Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

vc_portfolio

Read-only

UNDERSTANDING — A VC firm's portfolio companies, each matched to the network and rated. Filter publishes_api=true (companies that actually ship an API — about 37% of any book), in_network=true, band, or min_score; sort by score (default), api_count, or name. The demand-side view of who a fund has backed. Understanding plan. Priced per result — $0.005 per request plus $0.0002 per record returned (less past 100), capped at $0.50 a request, under pay-as-you-go; included in Understanding and Influence. Estimate first at /api/v1/prices/estimate. See apis://prices.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bandNoexemplar | strong | developing | thin | minimal.
pageNoPage number, 1-based (default 1).
slugYesVC firm slug, lowercase and hyphenated, as find_vcs returns it.
sortNoOrder: score, api_count or name.
limitNoResults per page, 1-100 (default 25).
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.
min_scoreNoOnly companies whose Kin Score composite is at or above this, 0-100.
in_networkNoOnly portfolio companies that resolve to a provider on the network.
is_providerNoOnly portfolio companies with a provider profile on the network. Nearly every row qualifies (a profile is created for each portfolio company), so this barely narrows anything — use publishes_api instead.
publishes_apiNoOnly portfolio companies that publish an API indexed on the network — the real rate is about 37% of a book, not 100%. This is the filter you want for "how much of this fund ships an API".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / band / description
      Previous value: -"Rating bands: exemplar, strong, developing, thin, minimal."New value: +"exemplar | strong | developing | thin | minimal."
    • 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."
    • changedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Previous value: -"Page number, 1-based (default 1). Use with `limit` to walk a long list."New value: +"Page number, 1-based (default 1)."
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_network / description
      Added value: +"Only portfolio companies that resolve to a provider on the network."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Results per page, 1-100 (default 25)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / min_score / description
      Added value: +"Only companies whose Kin Score composite is at or above this, 0-100."
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Added value: +"Page number, 1-based (default 1). Use with `limit` to walk a long list."
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"VC firm slug, lowercase and hyphenated, as find_vcs returns it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort / description
      Added value: +"Order: score, api_count or name."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / is_provider / description
      Previous value: -"Only portfolio companies that publish an API on the network."New value: +"Only portfolio companies with a provider profile on the network. Nearly every row qualifies (a profile is created for each portfolio company), so this barely narrows anything — use publishes_api instead."
    • addedInput schema / properties / publishes_api
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only portfolio companies that publish an API indexed on the network — the real rate is about 37% of a book, not 100%. This is the filter you want for \"how much of this fund ships an API\".",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  4. 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"
+}
  5. 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 genuinely non-obvious operational context: plan gating (Understanding/Influence), per-request plus per-record pricing with a $0.50 cap, and an estimate endpoint to check first. It does not cover error or empty-result behavior for an unknown slug, which keeps it from 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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by filters and then cost/resource pointers, so the ordering is sensible. The block is dense — the filter/sort enumeration duplicates the schema and the pricing sentence packs plan names, a formula, a cap, and two links in one breath — but nothing is truly wasted.

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?

For a 10-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, the high-value filters, and cost/plan constraints. Output shape is only hinted at ('matched... and rated'), which is a minor gap given no output schema exists to document the returned fields.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3 and the schema already carries the per-parameter meaning (including the useful publishes_api caveats). The description adds marginal extra value by stating the default sort and the aggregate selectivity of publishes_api ('about 37% of any book'), but most of the filter/sort list is restated from the schema.

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 names the specific resource and its scope: a VC firm's portfolio companies, each matched to the network and rated. The framing 'the demand-side view of who a fund has backed' cleanly separates it from find_vcs (which finds firms) and get_vc (which fetches one firm), so an agent can route without opening the schema.

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?

It states the context of use ('the demand-side view of who a fund has backed') and recommends which filter to reach for, noting publishes_api is the real selector and quantified at ~37% of a book. It never names an alternative tool or a when-not-to-use condition, so it stops short of full 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