Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SOTA2 — AI Solution Rankings

by io.github.leo9
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read AI product comparisons by task

find_ai_solutions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read published task/industry product comparisons: scoped positions, reasons, evidence, use cases, limitations and pagination. For a company shortlist or a detailed vendor comparison, start with find_ai_companies, then get_company for company/product facts. This tool accepts an English business problem or task and an optional industry; each scope previews up to three products with company IDs and follow-up calls. Positions belong to their scope. Preserve the requested industry and constraints, verify complete product fit, and keep missing coverage explicit.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "find_ai_solutions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of matching leaderboard scopes (1–5), each previewing up to three products. These scopes do not form a combined ranking.
queryYesEnglish business problem, workflow or task, e.g. 'companies that can automate customer support emails and live chat' or 'vendors that answer phone calls and book appointments'. Translate non-English requests while preserving their requirements. Use search_companies for company names or concise capability keywords.
offsetNoRow offset. Use nextOffset from the previous response.
industryNoOptional requested industry ID, slug or English name, e.g. healthcare, finance or logistics. Recognizable industries in the query are also retained; conflicting or multiple industries require selection.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"English business problem, workflow or task, e.g. 'companies that can automate customer support emails and live chat' or 'vendors that answer phone calls and book appointments'. Translate non-English requests while preserving their requirements. Resolve an already named vendor with search_companies."New value: +"English business problem, workflow or task, e.g. 'companies that can automate customer support emails and live chat' or 'vendors that answer phone calls and book appointments'. Translate non-English requests while preserving their requirements. Use search_companies for company names or concise capability keywords."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"English business need or task phrase, e.g. 'Find AI tools for drafting documents in healthcare'. Translate non-English requests while preserving their requirements. Resolve named vendors with search_companies."New value: +"English business problem, workflow or task, e.g. 'companies that can automate customer support emails and live chat' or 'vendors that answer phone calls and book appointments'. Translate non-English requests while preserving their requirements. Resolve an already named vendor with search_companies."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavior: each scope previews up to three products with company IDs and follow-up calls, positions are scope-local (not a combined ranking), and missing coverage should be kept explicit. That prevents the common misread of treating scopes as a merged ranking.

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?

Front-loaded with what is returned, then routing guidance, then input semantics — a sensible order. Slightly dense in the final sentence ('Preserve the requested industry and constraints, verify complete product fit...'), which reads as extra agent instruction rather than tool description.

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 needn't restate return fields, and it still covers preview limits, scope semantics, pagination surface, and the follow-up call path. Adequate for an open-world read tool; only the sibling ranking/company tools lack explicit contrast.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description goes beyond it by framing query as an English business problem/task and industry as optional, and by reinforcing that 'positions belong to their scope' and constraints/industry must be preserved. It adds interpretive meaning rather than repeating field text.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Read published task/industry product comparisons' and enumerates what's returned (positions, reasons, evidence, use cases, limitations, pagination). It distinguishes the tool from find_ai_companies/get_company for the shortlist flow, though it doesn't differentiate against get_solution_rankings or search_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?

Explicitly routes: 'For a company shortlist or a detailed vendor comparison, start with find_ai_companies, then get_company.' It also defines input expectations (English business problem, optional industry). Missing explicit exclusions relative to get_solution_rankings and search_companies, which are only mentioned inside the schema.

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

All SOTA2 — AI Solution Rankings 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