StackFast FractWin Expert Brain

GrowthOS Scorecard

growthos_scorecard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Build a private GrowthOS Revenue Capture Scorecard from supplied public business signals. Human buyers start at /growthos/scorecard; MCP execution requires reader entitlement. Returns scorecard findings only; it never sends outreach.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sender`	No	Optional sender identity with sender_name and geography.
`prospect`	No	Single local-business prospect input.
`prospects`	No	Batch of up to 25 local-business prospect inputs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`tool`	Yes
`public_name`	No
`no_autonomous_outbound`	No
`review_required_before_send`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedJun 11, 2026

removedOutput schema / description

Removed value: -"Structured JSON result envelope. Tool-specific fields vary by product surface; outputs are governed, audit-safe, and omit secrets."

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "no_autonomous_outbound": {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  "ok": {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  "public_name": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "review_required_before_send": {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  "tool": {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "ok",
+  "tool"
+]
```

AddedJun 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the output is a private scorecard, it returns findings only, it never sends outreach, and it requires reader entitlement. This clearly communicates side-effect boundaries and authorization needs that annotations alone do not fully convey.

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 three tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and every sentence earning its place. It covers what it builds, what access is required, and what it never does, without redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only scorecard tool, the description covers purpose, input source, authorization, output scope, and key side-effect boundaries. Since an output schema exists, return details are externally handled; the main gap is not addressing how to select between the optional prospect and prospects parameters or sibling routing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Input schema coverage is 100%, with descriptions for sender, prospect, and prospects including a batch limit of 25. The tool description adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond the general notion of 'public business signals,' so it stays at the baseline for well-schematized parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('Build') and clearly identifies the resource ('GrowthOS Revenue Capture Scorecard') and input source ('supplied public business signals'). It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling GrowthOS tools like growthos_revenue_capture_packet or growthos_opportunity_scout_packet, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides useful context such as 'MCP execution requires reader entitlement' and 'it never sends outreach,' but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over related alternatives or when not to use it. Usage context is present but largely implied rather than directed.

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

All StackFast FractWin Expert Brain 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.

Resources

Need Help?