Skip to main content
Glama

remodeleriq

by io.github.gustavoatar

compare_bids

Read-onlyIdempotent

Deprecated: prefer remodeleriq_compare_bids. Compare 2–5 contractor bids side-by-side with per-trade cost comparison, scope-gap matrix, and winner recommendation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bidsYes2–5 contractor bids to compare side-by-side.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bidsYes
_metaNo
winnerNo
all_flagsNoAll critical and high-severity flags across every bid.
bid_countYes
scope_gapsYesTrades present in some bids but absent from others, with estimated gap value.
outlier_flagsNoTrades where one bid is ≥2× or ≤0.5× the median.
cost_comparisonYesPer-trade cost table sorted by price variance (largest gap first).
apples_to_applesYesStated total + scope adjustment = adjusted comparable total per bid.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds transparency by describing the analytical outputs (per-trade comparison, scope-gap matrix, winner recommendation), giving a clear picture of what the tool returns. No contradictions with annotations.

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 a single sentence that efficiently front-loads the deprecation warning and then describes the tool's core functionality. It contains no filler or redundant information, and every phrase adds value.

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?

The tool is well-covered by annotations, a detailed schema, and an output schema. The description adds essential context about deprecation and the comparison features. While it doesn't describe error handling or the exact format of the 'winner recommendation,' these are inferable from the output schema and the tool's purpose, so the description is adequately complete for a deprecated tool.

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%, with the schema providing rich descriptions for the 'bids' array and its item properties (label, bid_text, bid_total, etc.). The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond reiterating the 2–5 range already present in the schema, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's sufficiency.

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 explicitly states the tool compares 2–5 contractor bids side-by-side with specific outputs (per-trade cost comparison, scope-gap matrix, winner recommendation). It also identifies the deprecated status and names the preferred sibling, making its purpose and differentiation clear.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description opens with 'Deprecated: prefer remodeleriq_compare_bids,' giving an explicit alternative and clearly indicating when not to use this tool. It also notes the bound of 2–5 bids, which guides appropriate input size.

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

All remodeleriq toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The deprecated tools are near-identical duplicates of the new prefixed tools, creating significant overlap. An agent could easily call analyze_bid instead of remodeleriq_analyze_bid, leading to confusion despite the deprecation notes.

Naming Consistency2/5

Two naming patterns coexist: the older unprefixed verbs (analyze_bid, get_cost_estimate) and the newer prefixed verbs (remodeleriq_analyze_bid). This inconsistency is minor on its own but combined with the duplicates it creates a jarring mix.

Tool Count3/5

The raw count of 6 is reasonable, but 3 tools are deprecated duplicates, so the effective unique toolset is only 3. This feels padded and slightly wasteful, though not egregious.

Completeness4/5

The three core functions—bid analysis, cost estimates, and labor rates—cover the primary homeowner needs for remodeling transparency. No obvious lifecycle gaps exist since this is a read/analyze API rather than a CRUD system.

Resources