Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

story_leads

Read-only

OWNER — The weekly "what's worth writing" rollup: ranked story leads from the demand map crossed with rating movement — unmet demand (searched, no result), risers/fallers, and hot-but-thin capabilities. Each lead is a headline, its signal, and a suggested angle. include=["raw"] appends the underlying demand report. Not purchasable: owner-only, at any price.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.
includeNoPass ["raw"] to include the raw demand and movement rows behind each lead.

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 / include / description
      Added value: +"Pass [\"raw\"] to include the raw demand and movement rows behind each lead."
  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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover reading is safe (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false). The description adds genuinely non-structured context: owner-only access, weekly generation cadence, the structure of each lead, and that include=["raw"] appends the underlying report. It does not mention auth mechanics beyond entitlement or rate limits, so it stops short of a 5.

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-loaded with the identity and scope, followed by lead content and the raw-inclusion flag; nearly every clause earns its place. It is dense but not padded, losing a point only for packing several ideas into long em-dash clauses that take a second read.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description steps in to explain the return shape ('a headline, its signal, and a suggested angle') and the optional raw extension, plus the access constraint. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this correctly is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description only reiterates the include=["raw"] behavior that the schema already explains, and never mentions the context parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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: a ranked rollup of story leads derived from the demand map crossed with rating movement. It further defines the three lead types and output shape (headline, signal, suggested angle), so an agent knows exactly what this produces versus generic siblings like find_rating_movers.

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 'OWNER' marker and 'Not purchasable: owner-only, at any price' line give an entitlement/audience constraint, and 'weekly' implies cadence. However there is no explicit when-to-use statement or comparison against alternative tools that also surface movement (e.g. find_rating_movers, whats_changed), leaving selection 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