Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_agent_readiness

Read-only

EXPLORE — the agent-readiness dimensions and standalone score for ONE provider (spec presence, MCP server, auth clarity, idempotency, error semantics, rate-limit signal, well-known catalog, consent identity, dry-run…). A STANDALONE score, not a slice of the composite. For the same question across the catalog — who is agent-ready, which dimensions have actually diffused — use find_agent_readiness (Influence). Priced B1 (single-entity synthesis) — $0.01 per call under pay-as-you-go; included in Understanding and Influence. See apis://prices.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesProvider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. "stripe".
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.

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 / slug / description
      Added value: +"Provider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. \"stripe\"."
  3. 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"
+}
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: an explicit price/plan model (B1, $0.01, included in Understanding/Influence) and the fact that the returned score is standalone, not a composite slice. It does not describe response shape, but no output schema exists, so this is a meaningful supplement.

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 EXPLORE scope and the sibling contrast, then pricing last, which is a sensible order. It is dense with lists and price detail but every element carries routing or cost information; nothing is filler.

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 compensates by naming the dimensions returned and clarifying the score's standalone nature, plus routing and cost. Close to complete for a single-entity lookup; only the exact response shape is unspecified.

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 schema already documents both the slug and context parameters, including the 'lowercase, hyphenated' format. The description adds no parameter syntax or semantics beyond that baseline, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource (agent-readiness dimensions and standalone score for ONE provider) and even enumerates the dimensions covered. It explicitly distinguishes itself from find_agent_readiness, so an agent can pick correctly 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Names the alternative (find_agent_readiness) and the exact condition that selects it (catalog-wide 'who is agent-ready' questions). The single-provider scope is clear, leaving nothing to inference.

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