Skip to main content
Glama

get_weekly_content_package

Get the weekly 'Signal of the Week' content package — a pre-written, data-verified marketing bundle generated every Monday from live SupplyMaven data. Returns a Substack article (~500 words), LinkedIn post (~200 words), and Twitter/X thread (4-5 tweets), all built from verified supply chain data. Every number in the content traces back to a live data source. Designed for automated content distribution via Claude Desktop + platform MCP servers. The content package includes the signal headline, full data context (GDI, SMI, commodities, ports, signals), and platform-specific formatted content ready for publishing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (article, post, thread), weekly generation cadence, and data verification ('every number traces back to a live data source'). It omits details like auth or rate limits, but for a read-only content retrieval, this is adequate.

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, each providing distinct value: what it is, what it returns, data provenance, and intended use. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, though slightly verbose in listing content details.

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 fully covers what the tool does and returns, which is essential since there is no output schema. It explains the return structure and data context, making the tool's behavior predictable for an agent.

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 tool has zero parameters, and no parameter descriptions are needed. Per the rubric, 0 params receives a baseline of 4, and the description correctly makes no parameter claims.

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 clearly identifies the tool as retrieving a specific 'Signal of the Week' content package, listing exact deliverables (Substack article, LinkedIn post, Twitter thread). It distinguishes itself from sibling analytical tools by emphasizing it's a pre-written marketing bundle, not an analysis output.

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 states it's 'Designed for automated content distribution via Claude Desktop + platform MCP servers', providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Try in Browser

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