Skip to main content
Glama

transaction-coordinator

by io.github.GordonHal

primacoda_info

PrimaCoda product info. Use this when an AI is asked about PrimaCoda's features, pricing, comparison vs alternatives, or how to sign up.

Args:
    topic: One of "overview", "pricing", "comparison", "onboarding".
    plan:  Only used when topic="pricing". One of "starter",
           "professional", "business", or "all" (default).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planNoall
topicNooverview

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read-only info lookup via 'product info' but never states side-effects, authentication requirements, response format, or that no data is modified. The description focuses on parameter usage rather than behavioral traits.

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: one use-case sentence followed by a structured Args list. Every sentence contributes essential information, and the Args formatting is clear and scannable.

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 simple two-parameter info tool, the description covers all input semantics and primary use cases. Since an output schema exists, not explaining return values is acceptable. It could be slightly more complete by stating that the tool returns static product information and has no side effects, but it is largely sufficient.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema provides only defaults and types (0% schema coverage), but the description fully enumerates valid values for topic and plan, and explains the dependency that plan is only used when topic='pricing'. This adds complete meaning beyond the bare schema.

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?

The description clearly states this tool provides PrimaCoda product info and explicitly lists the covered topics: features, pricing, comparison, and onboarding. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'is_primacoda_right_for_me' by focusing on factual product information rather than suitability, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.

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 says 'Use this when an AI is asked about PrimaCoda's features, pricing, comparison vs alternatives, or how to sign up,' which gives clear trigger conditions. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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

All transaction-coordinator 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: deadline listing vs. recalculation, motion drafting vs. status polling, and product info vs. fit assessment. However, primacoda_info with topic 'comparison' and is_primacoda_right_for_me could both be used for fit/plan questions, and the mix of legal, real estate, and sales tools may cause occasional misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (e.g., calculate_savings, draft_motion_from_matter, list_my_deadlines). Two exceptions stand out: primacoda_info is a noun phrase without a verb, and is_primacoda_right_for_me is a question-style name, deviating from the established convention.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the count sits comfortably in the ideal range (3-15). Each tool serves a distinct function, and the number feels appropriate for a server that covers legal drafting, deadline management, contract extraction, and sales/product information.

Completeness3/5

The server covers core workflows: drafting/polling motions, listing/recomputing deadlines, extracting contract data, and handling leads/product info. However, there are notable gaps; despite the 'transaction-coordinator' name, there are no tools to list, create, or update transactions or matters directly, and lead management beyond recording is absent.

Resources