Silicon Analysts

get_market_intelligence

Read-onlyIdempotent

Market Intelligence — the freshest SOURCED semiconductor market briefs, generated daily from a Tavily + Claude scan of primary press, earnings, and trade outlets. Each brief returns title, severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low), confidence_score (0-100), quantitative_impact (e.g. "Est. BOM increase: +$500"), an executive summary, a short analysis, a category (Logic/Memory/Packaging/Connectivity/Power/Geopolitics), and a curated sources[] list — plus per-record provenance. UNIQUELY: each brief also carries entities (the chips/nodes/packaging/HBM-gen/companies it concerns), impact (when it's a cost move, the per-chip BOM dollar deltas computed from Silicon Analysts' cost models — e.g. "HBM +20% → +$580 on B200" with a pre-filled calculator URL), and related (cross-links to the live datapoints + tools). No pure-news source does this. The machine feed returns ALL severities; published flags the Critical/High briefs that also have a public page. Public sources only; no insider data.

USE THIS for: "what's the latest in HBM / CoWoS / TSMC supply this week?", "any recent semiconductor price hikes, yield news, or capacity moves?", building a sourced market-news digest, grounding a claim about a recent supply-chain event.

DO NOT USE for: current absolute cost/pricing values (use get_accelerator_costs / get_wafer_pricing / calculate_chip_cost); structured data movements over time (use get_recent_changes); allocation/lead-time status (use get_foundry_allocation).

Filters: severity, category, since (ISO timestamp), publishedOnly (bool), limit (1-100, default 25). N2/Apple omitted (conflict-safe). Cite as "Silicon Analysts — Market Intelligence".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`since`	No
`category`	No
`severity`	No
`publishedOnly`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

AddedJun 27, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, but the description adds rich behavioral context: generated daily via Tavily + Claude, returns all severities with 'published' flag, public sources only, omits N2/Apple for conflict-safety, and per-record provenance. These details go well beyond the annotation hints.

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?

Although longer than typical, the description is efficiently structured into function, return fields, usage guidance, exclusions, and filters. Every sentence contributes necessary information for selection and invocation, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description thoroughly enumerates all return fields (title, severity, confidence_score, quantitative_impact, executive summary, analysis, category, sources, entities, impact, related) and explains filtering behavior. It is comprehensive enough for an agent to understand expected outputs and constraints.

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 input schema has no property descriptions, but the description lists each filter with type details (severity, category, since as ISO timestamp, publishedOnly as bool, limit 1-100 default 25). This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage, adding meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: returns 'semiconductor market briefs' with daily generation and details each returned field. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'UNIQUELY' features and explicitly listing alternatives in the DO NOT USE section.

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?

Explicit 'USE THIS for' and 'DO NOT USE for' sections provide concrete use cases and name alternative tools (get_accelerator_costs, get_wafer_pricing, calculate_chip_cost, get_recent_changes, get_foundry_allocation), making it clear when to select this tool versus others.

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

All Silicon Analysts tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Several tools overlap in domain and purpose, such as get_market_pulse vs get_market_intelligence and get_wafer_pricing vs get_foundry_economics. The detailed USE/DO NOT USE sections help, but the tool names alone do not always make the distinction obvious, requiring careful reading to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

18 of 20 tools follow a consistent get_<noun> pattern, with calculate_chip_cost and estimate_lead_time as minor deviations. No chaotic mixing of camelCase or inconsistent verb styles; the overall scheme is predictable and readable.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but reasonable for the server's broad scope covering cost modeling, capacity, allocation, HBM, policy, and market intelligence. Each tool has a distinct niche, though a few could potentially be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The server provides comprehensive coverage of semiconductor cost estimation, market data, fab capacity, allocation, HBM qualification, and policy timelines. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no dedicated memory pricing tool or general search), but these are covered through get_market_dataset and other tools; there are no critical missing functions for the stated domain.

Resources

Need Help?