Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

compare_providers

Read-only

UNDERSTANDING — Compare 2+ providers side by side: composite/band, per-facet leaders, an artifact-coverage matrix, and each provider's economics — audience, pricing basis, delivery, graded entry cost (USD/month) and marginal cost (USD per unit), with the plan and the quoted figure behind each number and the date it was read; cheapest_entry names the cheapest published way in. Priced B2 (cross-catalog synthesis) — $0.05 per call under pay-as-you-go; included in Understanding and Influence. See apis://prices.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.
providersYesProvider slugs to compare (2+).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable."New value: +"Optional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine non-redundant context: it is a billed synthesis call ($0.05, included in Understanding/Influence), names cheapest_entry as a computed output, and discloses provenance (quoted figure + date read).

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 output enumeration is front-loaded and informative, but the single em-dash-chained sentence is dense and overloaded, and the pricing/tier sentence plus apis://prices pointer add bulk beyond what is needed to select and call the tool.

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 no output schema, the description does the work of describing the return payload in detail, which is exactly what is needed. It stops short only on pagination/limits and explicit alternative-tool routing, minor for a bounded 2-param comparison call.

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% for both parameters, so baseline is 3. The description confirms the 2+ provider requirement but adds no syntax, slug-format, or context-parameter detail beyond what the schema already documents.

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 (compare) plus resource (providers) and enumerates the distinct outputs — composite/band, per-facet leaders, artifact-coverage matrix, economics — so an agent can distinguish it from get_provider or find_providers without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The '2+ providers side by side' phrasing implies the use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing against adjacent siblings like match_providers, find_similar_providers, or compare_cohorts.

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

All apis-io toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources