Trakkr

The tool set is large with several overlapping read-only views across domains (e.g., get_citations vs. get_visibility_scores vs. get_model_breakdown; get_crawler_overview/detail/live/pages/access/submit). Some tools are clearly distinguished by purpose (e.g., get_opportunities vs. list_opportunity_pool vs. get_content_ideas), but the many near-synonymous getters for visibility and crawler data create selection risk. A few tools are very thin (get_crawler_submit_status, preview_crawler_access_fix, send_crawler_verification_ping) with minimal descriptions that add ambiguity.

The majority use get_* for reads and manage_* or bulk_manage_* for writes, with occasional verb-first tools like add_knowledge, commit_opportunity, compare_brands, discover_publishers, export_data, generate_article, list_prompts, mark_notifications_read, run_diagnosis, scan_reddit, submit_crawler_to_search, suggest_prompts, update_brand_aliases. This is a mix of get_/manage_ prefixes with verb_noun forms, but it is not chaotic; it follows a mostly predictable pattern with some exceptions (e.g., bulk_manage_prompts vs. manage_prompt; commit_opportunity vs. manage_action; preview_crawler_access_fix is an odd verb-noun).

81 tools is far above the typical well-scoped server. While the domain is broad (AI visibility monitoring, crawler access, content, competitor analysis, Reddit, workflows), this count is heavy and will strain agent context. It feels like every dashboard view and sub-action was exposed as a separate tool rather than consolidated. Many tools are narrowly scoped (e.g., get_crawler_submit_status, preview_crawler_access_fix, send_crawler_verification_ping) which inflates the count without adding much distinct capability.

The tool surface is very comprehensive: reads and writes exist for prompts, actions, opportunities, knowledge, crawler, workflows, Reddit, webhooks, articles, reports, and configuration. The only notable gaps are around actual article authoring (only generate_article, no update/delete for articles) and workflow authoring is explicitly not exposed (only lifecycle actions). Given the breadth, these are minor gaps and the overall lifecycle coverage is strong.