GetCited

Read the site's profile

get_project_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

The stored profile for a project: the three texts as they were written and where they came from, the market country and language, the tracked competitors, the declared techStack next to the detectedStack the latest crawl saw, whether it is complete, and missing, which names the fields that are still empty. Call it before list_opportunities to see whether set_project_profile is needed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	Project id (a UUID) from add_project or list_projects, e.g. "0190f7a2-8c1e-7d3a-9b4f-2e6c1a5d8f30"

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`missing`	Yes	Profile fields still empty; the strategy tools refuse while this is non-empty
`audience`	Yes	Who buys it
`completed`	Yes	true once productSummary, valueProposition and audience are all filled in
`projectId`	Yes
`techStack`	Yes	What the site is built with, as declared; the audit prefers it over detectedStack
`competitors`	Yes	Tracked competitor hostnames, at most 5
`completedAt`	Yes
`detectedStack`	Yes	What the latest crawl recognised from the HTML, or null when nothing matched
`marketCountry`	Yes	Two-letter country the checks are run for, e.g. us
`profileSource`	Yes	Where the texts came from, when the owner did not write them
`marketLanguage`	Yes	Two-letter language, e.g. en
`productSummary`	Yes	What the product is, as the customer wrote it
`valueProposition`	Yes	Why someone picks it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 29, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description

Previous value: -"Project id (a UUID) from list_projects or add_project"New value: +"Project id (a UUID) from add_project or list_projects, e.g. \"0190f7a2-8c1e-7d3a-9b4f-2e6c1a5d8f30\""

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 24, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / detectedStack

Added value: +{
+  "description": "What the latest crawl recognised from the HTML, or null when nothing matched",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / profileSource

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Where the texts came from, when the owner did not write them",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / techStack

Added value: +{
+  "description": "What the site is built with, as declared; the audit prefers it over detectedStack",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "productSummary",
-  "valueProposition",
-  "audience",
-  "marketCountry",
-  "marketLanguage",
-  "competitors",
-  "completed",
-  "completedAt",
-  "missing"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "productSummary",
+  "valueProposition",
+  "audience",
+  "marketCountry",
+  "marketLanguage",
+  "competitors",
+  "techStack",
+  "detectedStack",
+  "profileSource",
+  "completed",
+  "completedAt",
+  "missing"
+]

AddedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered. The description adds the semantic of `missing` (naming empty fields) and a completeness flag, which is useful context, but says nothing about freshness, auth needs, or caching beyond what annotations provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The usage sentence is tight and earns its place, but the first sentence is a long comma-chained enumeration of return fields that largely duplicates the existing output schema. It is front-loaded with content rather than with a statement of what the tool does.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, yet it does so thoroughly and adds the workflow hook into list_opportunities/set_project_profile. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter exists and the schema documents it at 100% coverage (UUID format, pattern, and provenance 'from add_project or list_projects'). The description adds no parameter meaning, which is acceptable but not additive – baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description enumerates exactly what the stored profile contains (three texts and their provenance, market country/language, tracked competitors, declaredStack vs detectedStack, completeness, and `missing`), and says 'for a project', which separates it from the sibling get_page_profile. It never states an explicit retrieval verb itself, leaning on the title for that, so it stops just short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives concrete routing: 'Call it before list_opportunities to see whether set_project_profile is needed' names both the ordering constraint and the sibling tool that may follow. There is no explicit when-not condition, but the trigger and alternative are unambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All GetCited tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.