Skip to main content
Glama

Ergora Specialists

by io.github.ergoracloud
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ergora Leadership Specialist

ergora_leadership
Read-onlyIdempotent

Ask the Ergora Leadership specialist (managing teams, execution, feedback). Returns summarised, cited insights from a curated knowledge base of practitioners, books and research.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoOptional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call.
queryYesThe question or topic to research (natural language).
top_kNoHow many insights to return (1-10).
subscribeNoOptional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / subscribe
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The user's email — unlocks the free tier (30 queries/day vs 5/day anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."New value: +"Optional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description does add a real behavioural detail by characterising the output as summarised and cited from a curated knowledge base, which matters since there is no output schema. It says nothing about latency, retrieval behaviour, or what happens when the knowledge base has no match.

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?

Two sentences with zero filler: the first establishes who to ask and about what, the second establishes what is returned. The domain scope is front-loaded where an agent scanning siblings will see it first.

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 single-query retrieval tool with full schema coverage and annotations handling the safety profile, the description covers purpose and return shape adequately. The main remaining gap is sibling disambiguation within a large, overlapping specialist family, which the description only partially addresses through its topic parenthetical.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including non-obvious details like the email free-tier unlock and the top_k range, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no parameter-level meaning at all, which is the expected baseline 3 when the schema is this complete.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Ask the Ergora Leadership specialist') and scopes the domain with parenthetical examples ('managing teams, execution, feedback'), which separates it from the generic ergora_ask. It also says what comes back ('summarised, cited insights from a curated knowledge base'). It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead when the topic straddles domains.

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 parenthetical topic scope implies when this specialist is the right one, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement and no routing against adjacent siblings like ergora_hr or ergora_business_strategy, whose remits clearly overlap with 'managing teams, execution, feedback'. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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

All Ergora Specialists toolsInspect
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