Skip to main content
Glama

pops4-mcp-catalog

by io.github.HuangGoodmanAgency
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

brand_carriage_estimate

Calculate what a branded programme costs per thousand impressions across the four populations that carry a brand — employees, gig and contract workers, vendors, peers — and compare it against a CPM the buyer supplies. Returns programme cost, annual impressions, cost per thousand, the multiple against bought media, and one cited Nielsen figure with its caveat. Read-only. Use when a buyer asks what a culture or brand programme is worth, or how to justify the spend. Supply ANY of the four populations — employees are not required, so a vendor-and-peer-only programme can be modelled.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
peersNoPeer count — the buyer estimates this
vendorsNoVendor count — the buyer estimates this
your_cpmNoThe buyer's own CPM from their media plan, USD
employeesNoEmployee headcount (optional, like all four populations)
gig_workersNoGig and contract worker count
cost_per_peerNoProgramme cost per peer, USD
cost_per_vendorNoProgramme cost per vendor, USD
cost_per_workerNoProgramme cost per worker, USD
cost_per_employeeNoProgramme cost per employee, USD
impressions_per_peerNoDefault 1500
impressions_per_vendorNoDefault 1200
impressions_per_workerNoDefault 600
impressions_per_employeeNoImpressions per employee per year (default 900)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / employees / description
      Previous value: -"Employee headcount"New value: +"Employee headcount (optional, like all four populations)"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "employees"
-]New value: +[]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description states the tool is 'Read-only' and lists exactly what it returns (programme cost, annual impressions, cost per thousand, multiple against bought media, and a cited Nielsen figure with its caveat). This provides full transparency into the tool's behavior, especially since no annotations are present.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is overly verbose and repetitive, restating the same concepts (four populations, returns, usage) multiple times. It lacks a clear, concise structure and could be condensed to a few sentences without losing information.

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 description provides all necessary context for an agent to decide when to use the tool and what to pass. It covers the tool's purpose, usage scenario, return values, and parameter flexibility, making it fully self-contained even with no annotations.

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 schema descriptions already cover each parameter well, including defaults. The tool description adds value by emphasizing that all parameters are optional and that any combination of the four populations can be supplied, reinforcing the schema's optional nature.

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 the tool calculates cost per thousand for a branded programme across four populations and compares it to a buyer-supplied CPM. While the purpose is unambiguous, the description is somewhat redundant, restating the same information multiple times.

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 says when to use the tool: 'Use when a buyer asks what a culture or brand programme is worth, or how to justify the spend.' It also provides guidance on parameter usage, clarifying that any of the four populations can be supplied and that employees are optional.

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

All pops4-mcp-catalog 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