GPU Economy - cloud GPU prices

Compare two GPUs

compare_gpus

Read-only

Two GPU models side by side: VRAM, median rate card and panel size, cheapest on-demand rate, price per GB of VRAM, retail median where one exists, and every provider that lists both on-demand with the signed difference. Live quotes only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`a`	Yes	First GPU id or name (h100-sxm, "H200").
`b`	Yes	Second GPU id or name.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`a`	No
`b`	No
`both`	No
`note`	No
`cite_as`	Yes	How to cite this answer: GPU Economy, the page, the data date.
`attribution`	Yes
`difference_is`	No
`data_updated_at`	Yes	Newest scrape behind the answer (ISO 8601).
`providers_listing_both`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 1, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / cite_as

Added value: +{
+  "description": "How to cite this answer: GPU Economy, the page, the data date.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "data_updated_at",
-  "attribution"
-]New value: +[
+  "data_updated_at",
+  "attribution",
+  "cite_as"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedOct 1, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "a": {},
+    "attribution": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "b": {},
+    "both": {},
+    "data_updated_at": {
+      "description": "Newest scrape behind the answer (ISO 8601).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "difference_is": {},
+    "note": {},
+    "providers_listing_both": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "data_updated_at",
+    "attribution"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results come from live quotes only (no historical or retail-only fallback), and it names the exact comparison facets returned. It stops short of stating how missing data is handled (e.g. 'retail median where one exists' hints but doesn't explain).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence that opens with the core action and then lists the compared fields; no filler or repetition. The list is long but each field earns its place by telling the agent what data it gets back.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, yet enumerating the compared fields helps an agent decide relevance. Combined with annotations covering the safety profile and full schema coverage, almost nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented there, including the id-or-name format example ('h100-sxm', "H200"). The description adds nothing about parameter interpretation beyond confirming that both inputs are GPU models, so the 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?

Names a specific verb (compare) and resource (two GPU models) and enumerates exactly which attributes are put side by side (VRAM, median rate card, cheapest on-demand rate, price per GB of VRAM, retail median, provider deltas). This lets an agent distinguish it from gpu_prices (single-model pricing) and compare_providers (provider-level, not GPU-level) without opening any schema.

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?

'Live quotes only' scopes the tool to current pricing rather than history, which is a useful selection hint against price_history. However, it never states when to prefer this over compare_providers or gpu_prices, nor any prerequisites, so usage is only implied.

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

All GPU Economy - cloud GPU prices tools Inspect

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

Need Help?