Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

gap_analysis

Read-only

UNDERSTANDING — For each provider: high-value artifacts it lacks (MCP, Arazzo, Rules, Skills…), what its peers commonly publish but it lacks, and its score vs the peer median — plus stack-level gaps across the set. 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.
min_shareNoPeer-share threshold for a gap (0–1, default 0.25).
providersYesProvider slugs (1+). Multiple = treat as a stack.

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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-obvious context: it sketches the return shape (lacks, peer-common artifacts, score vs median, stack-level gaps) and discloses the pricing tier (B2, cross-catalog synthesis, $0.05/call, included in Understanding/Influence) with a pointer to apis://prices.

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?

Content is front-loaded (output semantics first, pricing last) and dense but purposeful. The pricing/packaging sentence is long but earns its place by disclosing cost behavior an agent should know before calling.

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 usefully conveys the return structure and pricing, which is what an agent most needs for this read-only synthesis tool. The main gap is routing guidance relative to the other gap-analysis siblings.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'Multiple = treat as a stack' mirrors the schema's own note on the providers array and adds no new meaning for any parameter.

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 names a specific analysis (per-provider gaps in high-value artifacts, peer-relative shortfalls, score vs peer median) plus stack-level rollup, so the verb+resource is clear. It does not, however, differentiate itself from close siblings such as industry_gap_analysis, company_gaps, or report_gap, leaving the agent to infer which scope applies.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus the several similarly named gap siblings. The description describes what comes back but offers no conditions, prerequisites, or alternative routing guidance.

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
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources