TrendIdea

analyze_url

Read-only

Analyse any company website by URL: extract its business model, target market and competitive advantage, then match it against TrendIdea data. Use it to profile a competitor or inspiration site before shaping your own idea. Reaches the live web to fetch the page and runs AI extraction. Costs 1 credit. Pass an https:// URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The URL to analyze (must be https://)
`language`	No	Response language	en

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	The tool result rendered as human and AI readable text or markdown.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds valuable context: it reaches the live web, runs AI extraction, costs 1 credit, and requires an https URL. This exceeds what annotations alone provide without contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences: the first delivers the core purpose and extraction details, the second provides usage guidance and critical constraints. No fluff, all information is immediately relevant.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (live web access, AI extraction, credit cost) and that an output schema exists, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, when to use, side effects, and constraints. It doesn't detail output fields, but the schema handles that.

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 covers both parameters 100% with descriptions for url and language. The description reinforces the https constraint but adds no new semantic meaning beyond that. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool analyses a website URL, extracts specific elements (business model, target market, competitive advantage) and matches against TrendIdea data. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_moat_analysis which focus on existing ideas rather than external URLs.

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?

Explicitly states use case: 'Use it to profile a competitor or inspiration site before shaping your own idea.' While it doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use, the context is clear and actionable.

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

All TrendIdea tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function or data aspect, from idea CRUD to simulations, content generation, and team management. Despite the large number, descriptions clearly differentiate purposes, e.g., 'get_idea_summary' vs. 'get_idea_agents' vs. 'get_idea_evolution'. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., 'create_idea', 'get_competitive_density', 'toggle_favorite'). No mixing of conventions like camelCase or abbreviations. The pattern is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count2/5

63 tools is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the platform's broad scope (idea validation, B2B, team, simulations) justifies many, the sheer volume can overwhelm an agent. A more curated subset or grouping would improve coherence.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full startup idea lifecycle: creation, validation, retrieval of various analyses, updates, deletion, sharing, simulations, B2B lead generation, team collaboration, and market intelligence. No obvious gaps exist for the stated domain.

Resources

Need Help?