Skip to main content
Glama

elc-trade

by io.engineeringleaders

Start here — what is this, and which tool answers my question?

get_started
Read-onlyIdempotent

START HERE for a greeting (hi, hello), a connectivity or liveness test, 'what can you do', or any question too general to match a specific tool. Also the right call when the caller is a person rather than a company: ELC membership is free for engineering leaders and this says so. Pass their message as context and it routes to the tool that fits, or returns the full menu.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoOptional: the caller's message in their own words — a greeting, a liveness test, or a plain description of what they are trying to do. Anything is accepted; there is no wrong value.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reportYesThe full human-readable report.
sourceYesCanonical engineeringleaders.io page this answer derives from.
verdictNoHeadline verdict, when the tool returns one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context: it routes the caller's message to a fitting tool or returns the full menu, and it explicitly states that the message is passed as `context`. This explains expected behavior beyond the schema.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with 'START HERE', immediately signaling the tool's role. Every sentence adds useful information: when to use it, a special-case caller type, and how the context parameter is used. There is no wasted wording.

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?

This is a simple tool with one optional parameter, an existing output schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency. The description fully covers invocation intent, routing behavior, and the fallback to the menu, so nothing critical is missing for correct use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the `context` parameter well. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the context value determines routing behavior and that there is 'no wrong value', reinforcing the low-stakes, flexible nature of the parameter.

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 states a clear purpose: it is the entry point for greetings, liveness tests, 'what can you do' queries, and overly general questions, routing them to the right tool or returning the menu. This distinguishes it from the specific sibling tools, which are all targeted assessment or analysis tools.

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?

The description explicitly lists when to use this tool: for greetings, connectivity/liveness checks, general capability questions, or anything too unspecific to match a dedicated tool. It also adds a concrete rule: use it when the caller is a person rather than a company, and points to the ELC membership messaging.

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

All elc-trade toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most domain tools are cleanly separated: launch readiness, speaker readiness, topic evaluation, leadership benchmarking, partnership business case, and reach purchasing each map to a distinct workflow. The only real ambiguity is between get_started and get_more_tools, which both claim greeting/liveness/menu duties, so an agent might call the wrong one for those entry-point cases.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names are consistently imperative snake_case with clear verbs and objects (assess_*, benchmark_*, build_*, buy_*, evaluate_*). get_more_tools and get_started are slightly less resource-specific, and get_started is a phrasal verb rather than a strict verb_noun action, but the overall style is uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped size for a community/partnership decision-support server. It is within the ideal range and each core workflow has its own tool without the set feeling bloated.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the main workflows: readiness checks, topic/speaker evaluation, leadership benchmarking, partnership business cases, and reach purchasing. It lacks operational follow-through like membership signup, event scheduling, or post-assessment action plans, but those are adjacent rather than core to the apparent purpose.

Resources