Skip to main content
Glama

supply-chain-intelligence

by io.github.SupplyMaven-SCR

get_customs_friction_baseline

Get customs friction baseline scores by country. Returns a composite 0-100 score combining port congestion (55% weight) and customs/trade policy events (45% weight). Covers 21 countries across North America, East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Europe, Middle East, and South America. Higher score = more friction. Optional country parameter for single-country detail with component breakdown and 30-day history. Used by trade compliance teams, procurement managers, and logistics planners to assess customs clearance risk by country.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does disclose useful details like the 55/45 weighting, 21-country coverage, higher-score-means-more-friction, and 30-day history for country detail. However, it claims an optional country parameter that does not exist in the schema, which is misleading and undermines trust. It also doesn't mention data sources or update frequency.

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?

The description is four sentences and front-loads the core purpose and key facts. The weighting, coverage, and interpretation details are all relevant and non-redundant. The final sentence about target users adds context but is slightly expendable, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

Given there is no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, composite calculation, geographic scope, and score interpretation. The phantom country parameter and the lack of explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings are notable gaps. It also doesn't clarify what the aggregate response format looks like without a country selector.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has zero properties, so the baseline for 0 params is 4, but the description explicitly mentions an 'Optional country parameter' that is not represented in the schema. This is a direct contradiction and will lead an agent to attempt passing a parameter that will fail validation. The description should not invent parameters absent from the 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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'Get customs friction baseline scores by country.' It explains the composite 0-100 score and weights, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_customs_trade_events or get_port_congestion_trends by highlighting its combined nature.

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?

The description provides clear context by stating the tool is used by trade compliance teams, procurement managers, and logistics planners to assess customs clearance risk. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the composite score definition implies its role relative to more specialized tools.

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

All supply-chain-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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a specific and distinct supply chain intelligence need, such as monitoring port congestion, tracking commodity prices, or analyzing trade policy. While there are multiple tools related to signals and ports, each has a clearly defined purpose (e.g., real-time monitoring vs. trend analysis vs. predictive signals), reducing ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use the 'get_' prefix (e.g., get_port_congestion_trends, get_border_delays), but several tools lack it, such as commodity_price_monitor, port_congestion_monitor, and supply_chain_risk_assessment. This mix of 'get_' and non-'get_' naming creates inconsistency. Additionally, some names are noun-heavy (risk_pillar_breakdown) while others are verb-noun (commodity_price_monitor).

Tool Count3/5

At 31 tools, the server is on the higher end of acceptable scope for a comprehensive supply chain intelligence platform. However, some redundancy exists (e.g., multiple signal and port tools), and the count may overwhelm agents without clear prioritization. It is slightly above the ideal range for coherence.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the major aspects of external supply chain risk: commodities, transportation (ports, borders, air, rail, chokepoints), manufacturing, macroeconomic indicators, trade policy, natural disasters, and labor actions. It also includes analytical tools like trend analysis and predictive signals, leaving no obvious gaps for its stated purpose of monitoring global supply chain disruptions.

Resources