durable-agent-directory

compare_tools

The six-criteria comparison matrix for two listings, side by side.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "a": "<a>",
      "b": "<b>"
    },
    "name": "compare_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`a`	Yes	First listing slug.
`b`	Yes	Second listing slug.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the output shape at a high level, a six-criteria matrix side by side, but does not explain permissions, error behavior, ordering, or how the six criteria are selected or scored.

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?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. The phrasing is slightly fragmentary, but it communicates the essential purpose efficiently.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter read tool, the description covers the core operation and output concept. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it should probably clarify the six criteria or mention behavior when one or both listings are invalid.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both parameters as listing slugs. The description adds little beyond confirming that the two inputs are listings compared side by side, so the baseline of 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 identifies the resource as a six-criteria comparison matrix for two listings, side by side, which is specific enough to distinguish it from single-listing tools like get_listing. The purpose is clear, though it is phrased as a noun fragment rather than an explicit action verb.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_listing, search_listings, or get_criteria. The only contextual cue is that it operates on two listings, but there is no explicit guidance about when comparison is appropriate or when it should be avoided.

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

All durable-agent-directory tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?