Scrutica

scrutica_get_supply_chain

Read-only

Return supply-chain relationships for one or more organizations. direction = 'upstream' traces suppliers (who feeds this entity); 'downstream' traces customers (who depends on this entity); 'both' returns both. Each edge carries supplier_org_id, customer_org_id and data_source; product_service, category, sole-source status, share and criticality appear only where the edge's cited source states them for that pair, and attribute_withholding gives the reason for every withheld value. Collection size: 20,798 supply-chain records across all sources (snapshot 2026-09-24). Of these records, 1,924 come from a licensed layer limited to relationships between organizations already in Scrutica's records.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`org_id`	No	Alias for org_ids; a single id may be passed as a bare string.
`org_ids`	No	REQUIRED. Scrutica org IDs in 'org-<slug>' format (e.g. ['org-nvidia', 'org-tsmc']), 1-5 of them. Optional in the schema only so the single-id aliases below can stand in.
`direction`	No		both
`company_id`	No	Alias for org_ids.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedAug 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / company_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Alias for org_ids."
+}

addedInput schema / properties / org_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Alias for org_ids; a single id may be passed as a bare string."
+}

changedInput schema / properties / org_ids / description

Previous value: -"Scrutica org IDs in 'org-<slug>' format (e.g. ['org-nvidia', 'org-tsmc'])"New value: +"REQUIRED. Scrutica org IDs in 'org-<slug>' format (e.g. ['org-nvidia', 'org-tsmc']), 1-5 of them. Optional in the schema only so the single-id aliases below can stand in."

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "org_ids"
-]
```

Changed1 schema field changedMay 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / org_ids / description

Previous value: -"Scrutica org IDs (e.g. ['nvidia', 'tsmc'])"New value: +"Scrutica org IDs in 'org-<slug>' format (e.g. ['org-nvidia', 'org-tsmc'])"

First observedMay 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses data provenance, partial attribute presence ('appear only where the edge's cited source states them'), and the reason field attribute_withholding. It also quantifies the snapshot size and the licensed-layer limitation, which an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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 text is information-dense but front-loaded: purpose first, then parameter behavior, then output semantics, then provenance caveats. Every sentence adds operational value and none repeats the schema.

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 specifies the core edge fields and the conditions under which optional attributes appear, so an agent knows what to expect. Collection size, snapshot date, and license restrictions cover the main interpretation risks. The input side is already covered by the schema and full enum semantics in the description.

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 schema leaves the direction enum values undefined, and the description fills that gap exactly with supplier/customer semantics. It also orients the record-level fields, though it relies on the schema for org_id/limit mechanics and does not compensate for all 40% of undocumented parameters.

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 opening sentence names the exact resource ('supply-chain relationships') and a specific action ('Return'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like scrutica_get_company and scrutica_get_facility. The direction values further clarify the purpose by naming the two relationship orientations.

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 gives a clear usage model: choose 'upstream' to trace suppliers, 'downstream' for customers, or 'both'. It does not name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops 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.

All Scrutica 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?