Skip to main content
Glama

tengu-firm

by io.github.Hlobo-dev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

tengu_v3_private_markets_company_page

The private-company DETAIL PAGE in ONE call, render-ready: identity + key facts + the valuation/revenue/headcount tapes + the financing-in-progress card + the team roster. Money ships as both a raw *_musd float and a formatted *_display string, every series is sorted ASCENDING for charting, and the hero valuation badge is computed server-side (never presented as an estimate unless it is one). Blocks degrade independently. Use this for a company PAGE; use /dossier for the analytical fan-out (investors/competitors/similar) and /realtime for live overlay.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tabNovaluation
teamNo
dealsNo
companyidNoAlias for company_id (PitchBook companyid).
company_idYesPath parameter 'company_id' (required). Also accepts 'companyid'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / company_id / description
      Previous value: -"Path parameter 'company_id' (required)."New value: +"Path parameter 'company_id' (required). Also accepts 'companyid'."
    • addedInput schema / properties / companyid
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for company_id (PitchBook companyid).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: money ships as both a raw '_musd' float and a formatted '_display' string, every series is sorted ASCENDING for charting, the hero valuation badge is computed server-side, and 'blocks degrade independently' signals partial-failure behavior. It omits auth/permission requirements and error semantics, but the disclosed traits go well beyond anything in 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Dense but front-loaded: the payload contents come first, then data-format guarantees, then the routing rule. Every sentence conveys distinct information. The em-dash-heavy list is slightly expensive to parse but nothing is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema, no annotations, and only 40% param coverage, the description does substantial work describing the returned blocks and their independent degradation. However, it leaves the tab/team/deals parameters unexplained, which is a meaningful omission for an agent choosing arguments.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 40% and the description never explains the five parameters. The 'tab' selector, the 'team' and 'deals' caps (defaults 60/200, max 500), and the company_id/companyid alias — which the schema does cover — receive no added meaning. Only 'team roster' obliquely hints at what 'team' controls. This is a real gap for a 5-param tool.

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+resource — 'The private-company DETAIL PAGE in ONE call' — and enumerates the concrete blocks returned (identity, key facts, tapes, financing-in-progress, team roster). It differentiates itself from the analytical fan-out and live overlay routes, though it names endpoint paths ('/dossier', '/realtime') rather than the sibling tool names, leaving a small mapping gap for the agent.

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 an explicit use-this/not-that rule: 'Use this for a company PAGE; use /dossier for the analytical fan-out … and /realtime for live overlay.' That is clear routing guidance with alternatives named. It stops short of stating prerequisites or when the tool is a poor fit for a nonexistent company_id, and the alternatives are paths rather than tool identifiers.

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

All tengu-firm 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