Skip to main content
Glama

GetCited

by dev.getcited
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Describe what this site sells

set_project_profile
Idempotent

Step one of the growth recipe, and the gate on the rest of it. Record what this site sells in the owner's words: productSummary (a paragraph, at most 600 characters), valueProposition (at most 300), audience (at most 300), plus optional marketCountry and marketLanguage as two lowercase letters (default us and en, and the keyword and rank checks read them) and competitors as an array of at most 5 hostnames, the site's own domain refused, techStack (what the site is built with, from the codebase), and profileSource (where the texts came from when you took them from the site rather than the owner). Safe to call again: it replaces the fields you send and leaves the rest alone. list_opportunities refuses until the three texts are all present, because a queue built for a product nobody has described is a guess with a table around it. Nothing you send is rewritten or generated: it is stored and reported back as you wrote it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
audienceNoWho buys it, in the owner's words
projectIdYesProject id (a UUID) from add_project or list_projects, e.g. "0190f7a2-8c1e-7d3a-9b4f-2e6c1a5d8f30"
techStackNoWhat the site is built with; read it from the codebase (package.json, config files). The audit uses it to tell a framework's by-design behaviour from a problem, from the next run_audit on. null clears it and falls back to detectedStack.
competitorsNoHostnames, e.g. ["rival.com"]. Replaces the stored list; an empty array clears it.
marketCountryNoTwo lowercase letters, e.g. "us". Defaults to us.
profileSourceNoWhere the three texts came from if the owner did not write them, e.g. "the site's meta description and homepage hero". Empty string clears it.
marketLanguageNoTwo lowercase letters, e.g. "en". Defaults to en.
productSummaryNoWhat the product is, one paragraph. Send an empty string to clear it.
valuePropositionNoWhy someone picks it over the alternatives

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
missingYesProfile fields still empty; the strategy tools refuse while this is non-empty
audienceYesWho buys it
completedYestrue once productSummary, valueProposition and audience are all filled in
projectIdYes
techStackYesWhat the site is built with, as declared; the audit prefers it over detectedStack
competitorsYesTracked competitor hostnames, at most 5
completedAtYes
detectedStackYesWhat the latest crawl recognised from the HTML, or null when nothing matched
marketCountryYesTwo-letter country the checks are run for, e.g. us
profileSourceYesWhere the texts came from, when the owner did not write them
marketLanguageYesTwo-letter language, e.g. en
productSummaryYesWhat the product is, as the customer wrote it
valuePropositionYesWhy someone picks it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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\""
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / profileSource
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Where the three texts came from if the owner did not write them, e.g. \"the site's meta description and homepage hero\". Empty string clears it.",
+  "maxLength": 200,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / techStack
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "nextjs",
+        "nuxt",
+        "sveltekit",
+        "remix",
+        "astro",
+        "gatsby",
+        "react_spa",
+        "vue_spa",
+        "angular",
+        "wordpress",
+        "shopify",
+        "webflow",
+        "wix",
+        "squarespace",
+        "framer",
+        "static",
+        "other"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "What the site is built with; read it from the codebase (package.json, config files). The audit uses it to tell a framework's by-design behaviour from a problem, from the next run_audit on. null clears it and falls back to detectedStack."
+}
    • 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"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: 'Safe to call again: it replaces the fields you send and leaves the rest alone' documents partial-merge semantics that idempotentHint alone does not convey, and 'Nothing you send is rewritten or generated: it is stored and reported back as you wrote it' sets expectations about storage fidelity. It also discloses field-level constraints (own domain refused for competitors, defaults of us/en) that no annotation covers.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the essential role ('step one... gate on the rest of it') before field detail, and each clause carries operational content. It is on the long side and includes rhetorical flourishes ('a guess with a table around it') that are characterful but not strictly necessary.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with an output schema (so returns need not be explained), the description covers the gating condition, defaults, clearing semantics, field constraints, and the write/merge behavior. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly appears to be missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is already 100%, but the description still adds real meaning: it says marketCountry/marketLanguage 'default us and en, and the keyword and rank checks read them', that competitors caps at 5 hostnames and refuses the site's own domain, that techStack should be read from the codebase, and what profileSource is for. It goes beyond restating the schema rather than merely duplicating it.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource — 'Record what this site sells in the owner's words' — and enumerates the exact fields being set (productSummary, valueProposition, audience, marketCountry/Language, competitors, techStack, profileSource). It is clearly distinguishable from the read-side sibling get_project_profile and from add_project/list_projects.

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?

Gives strong contextual guidance: it is 'step one of the growth recipe, and the gate on the rest of it', and it names the concrete dependency that 'list_opportunities refuses until the three texts are all present'. It does not name a sibling alternative for reading back the profile, so this falls just short of the explicit when/when-not/alternative bar.

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

All GetCited toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources