Skip to main content
Glama

ChurnLens

by io.github.kindrat86

score_saas_health

Score a SaaS business 0-100 across five dimensions — retention, growth, concentration, efficiency and durability — and return the composite. Every mapping is published, so the score can be reconstructed by hand.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nrr_pctYesNet revenue retention, as a percentage.
ltv_to_cac_ratioYesLifetime value divided by customer acquisition cost.
annual_plan_share_pctYesShare of revenue on annual contracts, as a percentage.
monthly_churn_rate_pctYesMonthly revenue churn, as a percentage (5 means 5%).
top_customer_share_pctYesLargest single customer's share of revenue, as a percentage.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions that the scoring mapping is published and replicable, but it does not disclose side effects (likely none) or the output format.

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 no redundancy: the first explains the core functionality, the second adds transparency. Every sentence earns its place.

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 scoring tool with 5 required parameters and no output schema, the description omits the return format (e.g., does it return just the composite or also breakdown?) and any examples.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds the conceptual dimensions (retention, growth, etc.) but does not map them to parameters; the schema already provides adequate per-parameter descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('score') and resource ('SaaS business') and lists the five dimensions. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools, which focus on individual metrics.

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 description implies use for a holistic SaaS health score versus sibling tools for specific aspects (e.g., churn, LTV), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites.

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

All ChurnLens 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct concept (revenue concentration, churn rate, LTV, zombie MRR, scoring bands, composite health). No two tools overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., analyze_revenue_concentration, calculate_churn_rate). No mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

6 tools is well-scoped for a specialized churn analytics server. Each tool earns its place, covering key metrics without bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the core churn analytics workflow: concentration, churn rates, LTV, zombie detection, scoring bands, and composite health. No obvious dead ends.

Resources