Skip to main content
Glama

Analook — Competitor Intelligence

by io.github.Gingiris

analyze_competitor

Submit a competitor analysis job.

Analyzes a competitor's website across 15+ data sources (SEO, traffic,
social, Product Hunt, GitHub, Wayback Machine history, AI-generated
insights, etc.) and returns a job_id. Use get_report_status(job_id) to
poll and get_report(job_id) to retrieve results when status='completed'.

Typical analysis takes 2-5 minutes. Requires authentication (deducts 1
credit from your Analook balance).

Args:
    url: Competitor website URL (e.g. 'https://linear.app' or 'lovable.dev')
    product_name: Optional product name override (defaults to domain)
    lang: Report language, 'en' (default) or 'zh' for Chinese output

Returns:
    {job_id: str, status: 'started', poll_url: str} on success
    {error: str, hint?: str} on auth/validation failure

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
langNo
contextYesExplain 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."
product_nameNo
conversation_idNoEcho the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool is asynchronous, takes 2-5 minutes, requires authentication (deducts 1 credit), and provides both success and error return shapes. This goes beyond simple mutation warnings and gives cost and flow context.

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 well-organized into an introductory sentence, Args block, and Returns block. Every sentence adds distinct value (scope, flow, timing, cost), with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The async job submission pattern, cost, expected duration, and follow-up steps are all explained. The return format is specified despite no output schema, and the data sources are enumerated, making the tool's behavior fully understandable.

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?

The Args section adds meaningful semantics for url (accepts domain or full URL with examples), product_name (defaults to domain), and lang (en/zh defaults). It omits context and conversation_id, but both already have detailed descriptions in the schema, so the description's coverage of domain-specific parameters is sufficient.

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 opens with 'Submit a competitor analysis job' and details the analysis scope (15+ data sources), making the tool's function specific and distinct from report retrieval tools. It clearly indicates this is for competitor websites and returns a job_id, setting it apart from sibling tools like get_report_status and run_growth_audit.

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 explicitly instructs to use get_report_status(job_id) for polling and get_report(job_id) after completion, and mentions typical analysis duration for timing expectations. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with run_growth_audit or other alternatives, so the when-not guidance is missing.

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

All Analook — Competitor Intelligence 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear distinct purposes: job submission, status polling, report retrieval, and listing are separated. Some potential confusion exists between get_report/get_report_markdown (same content, different format) and get_report_status/get_growth_audit (both return status for different job types), but descriptions clarify these boundaries.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores: analyze_competitor, browse_public_reports, get_growth_audit, get_report, get_report_markdown, get_report_status, list_my_reports, run_growth_audit. No mixed conventions or camelCase.

Tool Count5/5

8 tools is well-scoped for a competitor intelligence server, covering two distinct workflows (competitor analysis and growth audit) plus report browsing and retrieval. Each tool serves a clear purpose without feeling bloated or skeletal.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is covered: submit analysis, poll status, fetch report in JSON/Markdown, list personal reports, and browse public reports. Minor gaps remain, such as no way to list past growth audits or cancel/delete jobs, but these are not critical for the primary use case.

Resources