Tako

Tako: Graph Related

tako_graph_related

Read-onlyIdempotent

Explore what a graph node connects to — its metrics, the entities a metric covers, competitors, industry, index membership, and sources.

Two modes. Pass node_id alone for the map: every relation group with its key, label, total, and its first 3 names. Pass relation to page one group, where each item comes back with the id that explores it. Read a key off the map rather than guessing — an unknown key returns an empty group, not an error.

Best for: expanding a node you already resolved. Resolve a name to a node id with tako_available_data first. A metric listed here means the graph tracks it, not that a card exists — tako_search is the final check.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Case-insensitive substring filter on names and aliases, one string per call: "revenue" matches `Total Revenue` and misses `Sales`. Call once per name variant.
`label`	No	NER label to prefer among the related nodes — a boost, not a filter.
`limit`	No	Page size for a drilled relation. Omit it and the server serves 50. Ignored on the map, where every group returns its first 3 names whatever you pass.
`cursor`	No	Page handle from a previous drilled relation. Omit it for the first page.
`node_id`	Yes	Public id of the node to explore, as returned by `tako_available_data` or on a `tako_search` card.
`relation`	No	Relation key to page, taken from the map: metrics, entities, siblings, part_of, members, or a named edge like rel:competes_with. Omit for the map.
`infer_label`	No	Detect labels from `q`. Omit it and the server infers them whenever `q` is set.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`node`	Yes
`relation`	No	The one group you drilled.
`relations`	No	Every group, previewed. The map.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: unknown relation keys return an empty group rather than an error, items in a drilled relation come with an explorable id, and limit is ignored on the map. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: a clear purpose sentence, a relation-type list, then the two modes, then 'Best for' integration guidance. Every sentence contributes operational or decision-making value with no filler.

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?

For a 7-param tool with rich schema, output schema, and strong annotations, this description is complete. It covers the two usage modes, paging behavior, error behavior, the meaning of returned items, and the relation to sibling tools. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly."

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 already documents all 7 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds meaningful mode-level semantics: node_id alone returns the map, relation pages one group, a metric here means the graph tracks it, and relation keys should be read from the map rather than guessed. This adds real value beyond 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Explore what a graph node connects to,' listing concrete relation types like metrics, entities, competitors, industry, index membership, and sources. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by framing the tool as 'Best for: expanding a node you already resolved' and routing name resolution to tako_available_data.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit: resolve a name with tako_available_data first, use this tool to expand a resolved node, and treat tako_search as the final check for whether a card exists. It also clearly separates the two operational modes: map mode with node_id alone and paged mode with a relation key.

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

All Tako tools Inspect

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.