Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Andru

by io.github.geter-andru
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Portfolio readiness scorecard

get_portfolio_readiness_rollup

Portfolio oversight: use this when a PE or VC operator wants a scorecard across all their portfolio companies, or asks which company is most at risk. Returns each company's Revenue Readiness Index, comparable across companies, with the average, the at-risk count and customer-concentration risk.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "portfolioId": "<portfolioId>"
    },
    "name": "get_portfolio_readiness_rollup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quoteIdNoOptional: the quote_id from quote, to pay the quoted price (held for 30 minutes).
portfolioIdYesThe portfolio to roll up. whoami lists yours with their ids.
idempotencyKeyNoOptional: any unique string for this call. Retrying with the same key returns the first result and never charges twice.
maxAmountCentsNoOptional: the most this call may cost, in cents. If the price is higher, nothing runs and nothing is charged.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / portfolioId / description
      Previous value: -"The portfolio to roll up. Must belong to the caller."New value: +"The portfolio to roll up. whoami lists yours with their ids."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / maxAmountCents
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: the most this call may cost, in cents. If the price is higher, nothing runs and nothing is charged.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false despite this reading as a retrieval tool, and the schema carries quoteId, maxAmountCents and idempotencyKey — i.e. this call is priced and can charge money. The description never mentions cost, quoting, charging, or the 30-minute price hold, so an agent could invoke it oblivious to a financial side effect. It does describe the returned content well (average, at-risk count, concentration risk), which keeps this above 1.

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, no waste: the usage trigger comes first, the return contents second. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what comes back (per-company index, average, at-risk count, concentration risk) and the value is comparable across companies. The material gap is the paid nature of the call and the quote/maxAmount flow, which is the single most decision-relevant fact an agent needs before invoking it.

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%, so all four parameters — including the billing-related ones — are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond scope ("across all their portfolio companies"), so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — a rollup scorecard across all portfolio companies — and explicitly contrasts the scope with the single-company case ("which company is most at risk"), which distinguishes it from assess_company_readiness without naming it. It also names the key output metric (Revenue Readiness Index, comparable across companies).

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?

Gives an explicit usage trigger: a PE or VC operator wanting a cross-portfolio scorecard or asking which company is most at risk. It lacks an explicit exclusion pointing to the sibling single-company tool (assess_company_readiness) or a note on prerequisites beyond the schema's portfolioId reference.

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

All Andru 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