Skip to main content
Glama

Bnr Ro

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Compare Entities

compare_entities
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Compare X and Y" / "X vs Y" / "X versus Y" / "which is bigger / better / larger / more profitable" / "rank these companies" / "head to head" — side-by-side comparison of 2–5 companies or drugs in ONE parallel call. ALWAYS PREFER over sequential single-pack lookups when comparing entities. type="company" pulls LATEST 10-K revenue + net income + cash + long-term debt from SEC EDGAR/XBRL (off-calendar fiscal years handled correctly — AAPL Sep, NVDA Jan, etc.). type="drug" pulls FAERS adverse-event counts, FDA approval counts, active trial counts. Results sorted by primary metric so "largest" / "most" / "biggest" reads off the top of the response. Returns paired data + pipeworx:// citation URIs per entity. Replaces 8–15 sequential lookups.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type: "company" or "drug".
valuesYesFor company: 2–5 tickers/CIKs (e.g., ["AAPL","MSFT"]). For drug: 2–5 names (e.g., ["ozempic","mounjaro"]).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: specifies data sources (SEC EDGAR/XBRL, FAERS), handles off-calendar fiscal years, and mentions sorting and citation URIs. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is moderately concise for the amount of information, front-loading trigger phrases and key details. Some details (e.g., off-calendar handling) are valuable but slightly verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (two entity types, multiple metrics) and lack of output schema, the description covers data pulled, sorting, citation URIs, and efficiency claims, making it self-contained for an agent.

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%. The description adds meaning by explaining what data is pulled for each type (company metrics vs drug counts) and the format of values (tickers vs drug names), going beyond the schema 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 clearly states the tool performs side-by-side comparisons of 2–5 entities (companies or drugs) with explicit trigger phrases like 'X vs Y'. It distinguishes from siblings by advocating preference over sequential single-pack lookups (e.g., entity_profile).

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?

Usage context is explicit: use for comparisons instead of sequential lookups, with specific query patterns provided. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, though the preference is clear.

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

All Bnr Ro 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
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but some overlap exists between ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim, which could cause confusion. However, the descriptions help clarify when to use each.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names use a mix of patterns (verb_noun, noun_noun, adjective_noun) but are consistently lowercase with underscores. Some names are vague like 'forever' and 'recent_alerts', but overall readable.

Tool Count3/5

32 tools is on the high side for a single server, but many are specialized and serve a broad data query platform. Some tools are meta-tools covering multiple use cases, which could reduce the need for so many.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of functionalities including data querying, entity resolution, comparisons, verification, memory, subscriptions, and prediction markets. Minor gaps like data export are not critical for its purpose.

Resources