Skip to main content
Glama

market_report

Generate a comprehensive market report for a specific region. Includes: market size, price tiers, top players, contact availability, competitive landscape. Perfect for investors, business development, and market entry analysis. Args: region: Region name (e.g. 'Москва', 'Ленинградская область').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It lists what the report includes but does not disclose side effects, permissions, data sources, or response format. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 concise with three sentences plus an Args line, all front-loaded with essential information. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and parameter. However, it could be more complete by specifying region format requirements or potential async behavior.

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 description adds an 'Args' section with examples for the region parameter, significantly improving upon the schema which only defines it as a string. This provides clear guidance and usage examples.

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 states the tool generates a comprehensive market report for a specific region, listing included components (market size, price tiers, top players, etc.) and ideal use cases. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying its unique scope and content.

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 mentions it is perfect for investors, business development, and market entry analysis, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to similar siblings like 'market_analytics'.

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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes: search_companies, find_best_companies, smart_match, and contractor_recommendation all find contractors; get_company, company_portfolio, and company_deep_profile all return company details; calculate_cost and project_estimator both estimate costs. This makes it difficult for an agent to reliably choose the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix verb-first patterns (get_*, search_*, compare_*, calculate_*, export_*, find_*, request_*) with noun-first patterns (company_deep_profile, market_report, price_comparison, etc.). All names use snake_case, but the inconsistent verb/noun placement makes the set less predictable.

Tool Count3/5

24 tools falls squarely in the 16-25 'feel heavy' range. While the server covers a broad domain (companies, projects, analytics, leads, estimation), the presence of many overlapping tools suggests the count could be consolidated without losing functionality.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core domain well: searching companies and projects, retrieving full details, comparing entities, estimating costs, obtaining market analytics, and managing the lead lifecycle (request_quote -> get_lead_status). Minor gaps exist (e.g., no detailed per-review text, but that is explicitly stated as unavailable), but there are no dead ends for typical workflows.