Skip to main content
Glama

GetBotRank Free AI Search Tools

Brand Entity Checker

check_entity

Look up a brand on Wikidata and Wikipedia, report key properties, and check the site's Organization sameAs links.

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": {
      "brand": "<brand>"
    },
    "name": "check_entity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoFull URL, for example https://example.com/page
brandYesBrand or company name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the data sources (Wikidata, Wikipedia) and the check performed, but says nothing about what happens when the brand is not found, whether lookups are rate-limited or require auth, or whether url is optional in practice.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, sequencing the lookup, the reporting, and the sameAs check in execution order. Nothing is redundant.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say more about the shape of the reported properties and the failure modes. It conveys the general scope but leaves an agent guessing at what a result looks like.

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 schema already documents both brand and url. The description adds only marginal meaning, hinting that url relates to the site's Organization sameAs links, but does not clarify how the two parameters interact.

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?

The description names specific verbs and resources: looking up a brand on Wikidata and Wikipedia, reporting key properties, and checking Organization sameAs links. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which are all crawler/SEO/schema utilities. It falls short of a 5 because 'key properties' and 'sameAs links' are not specified concretely.

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?

Usage is implied - an agent can infer this tool is for verifying brand entity/knowledge-graph presence - but the description never states when to use it, when not to, or prerequisites such as whether the url parameter is needed for the sameAs check. No alternatives are named, which is acceptable given siblings are unrelated.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.