Agent-Readiness Audit

get_index_rank

Look up a domain on the public Agent-Readiness Index and return its rank among scored companies. The score includes the rubric version that produced it.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "get_index_rank"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	Domain to look up, such as stripe.com

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`rank`	Yes
`score`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`domain`	Yes
`listed`	Yes
`scanId`	Yes
`scored`	Yes
`scanUrl`	Yes
`category`	Yes
`rubricVersion`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 22, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / rubricVersion

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "integer",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "domain",
-  "listed",
-  "name",
-  "category",
-  "score",
-  "rank",
-  "scored",
-  "total",
-  "scanId",
-  "scanUrl"
-]New value: +[
+  "domain",
+  "listed",
+  "name",
+  "category",
+  "score",
+  "rubricVersion",
+  "rank",
+  "scored",
+  "total",
+  "scanId",
+  "scanUrl"
+]

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose that the index is public and that the returned score carries its rubric version, which is useful context. It says nothing about behavior for unscored/unknown domains (error vs. empty result), staleness/refresh of the rank, or rate limits.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the resource; no filler or restated schema text.

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?

An output schema is present, so return values need no explanation, and the one-parameter surface is trivially covered. The only meaningful gap is the not-found/unscored-domain behavior, which an agent would want before calling.

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 coverage is 100% and the single required parameter 'domain' is documented in the schema with an example. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'look up a domain on the public Agent-Readiness Index and return its rank.' It implicitly separates itself from scan_site (which would generate a score) by describing a lookup of an existing score, but it never names either sibling.

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?

Usage is only implied: this is the retrieval tool for an already-scored domain, as opposed to list_index (enumeration) or scan_site (producing a score). No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing is given.

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

All Agent-Readiness Audit tools Inspect

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

Need Help?