Skip to main content
Glama

elc-partnership-builder

by io.engineeringleaders
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Match a membership package to a goal and budget

match_package
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolves goal + budget through ELC's own routing matrix — the same one the website uses — and returns the matched package(s) with real prices and their default line items. Map free-text answers to the closest valid id; on bad input the error lists the valid ids, re-ask rather than guessing. Next: customize_package to toggle line items, or request_offer to send it as-is.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoRequired. One of the goal ids from get_partnership_options question_1
budgetNoRequired. One of the budget ids from get_partnership_options question_2
contextNoOptional. A short description of your goal and why you are calling this tool. Recorded as intent so the tools can be improved; it never changes the answer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / budget / description
      Previous value: -"One of the budget ids from get_partnership_options question_2"New value: +"Required. One of the budget ids from get_partnership_options question_2"
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\""New value: +"Optional. A short description of your goal and why you are calling this tool. Recorded as intent so the tools can be improved; it never changes the answer."
    • changedInput schema / properties / goal / description
      Previous value: -"One of the goal ids from get_partnership_options question_1"New value: +"Required. One of the goal ids from get_partnership_options question_1"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "goal",
-  "budget",
-  "context"
-]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "goal",
-  "budget"
-]New value: +[
+  "goal",
+  "budget",
+  "context"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the matrix is the same one the website uses, bad input produces an error listing valid ids, and the optional context value is recorded as intent but never changes the answer.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and its output, then error handling, then next steps. No filler, no restatement of the name or title.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the return-value burden and does explain that packages, real prices and default line items come back. It covers error behavior and downstream chaining. Minor gaps remain on whether multiple matches are common and what happens if the matrix yields no match.

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 goal, budget and context are already documented, including that context never affects the answer. The description only adds the fuzzy-mapping guidance ('map free-text answers to the closest valid id'), which refines usage rather than the parameters themselves. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Specific verb and resource: it resolves goal+budget through a named routing matrix and returns matched packages with real prices and default line items. That is far more concrete than the title alone. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling fit_to_budget, which plausibly does related budget matching, so an agent still has to infer which of the two to call.

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?

Gives concrete invocation guidance: map free-text answers to the closest valid id, and on error re-ask rather than guess. It also routes forward explicitly to customize_package (to toggle line items) and request_offer (to send as-is). It stops short of naming when NOT to use this tool in favor of fit_to_budget or design_journey.

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

All elc-partnership-builder toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources