Skip to main content
Glama

Ask Pipeworx

ask_pipeworx
Read-onlyIdempotent

PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH for questions about current or historical data: SEC filings, FDA drug data, FRED/BLS economic statistics, government records, USPTO patents, ATTOM real estate, weather, clinical trials, news, stocks, crypto, sports, academic papers, or anything requiring authoritative structured data with citations. Routes the question to the right one of 5,743 tools across 1500 verified sources, fills arguments, returns the structured answer with stable pipeworx:// citation URIs. Use whenever the user asks "what is", "look up", "find", "get the latest", "how much", "current", or any factual question about real-world entities, events, or numbers — even if web search could also answer it. Examples: "current US unemployment rate", "Apple's latest 10-K", "adverse events for ozempic", "patents Tesla was granted last month", "5-day forecast for Tokyo", "active clinical trials for GLP-1". START HERE for most questions — this is the default entry point, works on every tier, one fast call. Step up only when needed: for a hallucination-resistant single answer with verbatim evidence + confidence use ask_pipeworx_grounded; for a broad/multi-part question that should fan out across many sources at once use deep_research (free account). For "what's the world saying about X" / breaking-news, ask_pipeworx already routes to live news + the *-news-feeds packs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAlias for question.
textNoAlias for question.
inputNoAlias for question.
queryNoAlias for question.
promptNoAlias for question.
questionYesYour question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input as aliases.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations, it discloses routing behavior, automatic argument filling, structured output with stable pipeworx:// citation URIs, 'one fast call', and default entry-point status. It also clearly states a non-goal (single hallucination-resistant answer) by routing that case to a sibling.

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?

The instruction is front-loaded and dense, with every sentence earning its place: preferred behavior, example triggers, concrete sample questions, tier compatibility, and routing rules for siblings. Despite length, it avoids repetition and fluff.

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?

For a natural-language router with one required param and no output schema, this description is effectively complete: it tells the agent when to use it, what to pass, what to expect back, and when to switch to alternatives. The caveat about live news and the explicit default status remove likely remaining ambiguity.

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% and the single required param is already well documented as a natural-language question with aliases. The description adds semantic guidance by enumerating acceptable question domains (SEC, FDA, FRED/BLS, patents, real estate, weather, clinical trials, news, stocks, crypto, sports, papers) and concrete examples, though it does not add format-level constraints.

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 opens with a clear directive and states the specific resource: an authoritative data-routing tool that answers factual questions across 5,743 tools and 1500 verified sources, returning structured answers with citation URIs. It also differentiates itself from web search and from siblings like ask_pipeworx_grounded and deep_research.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH' and gives trigger phrases ('what is', 'look up', 'find', 'get the latest', 'how much', 'current') plus domain examples. It names alternatives with exact conditions: ask_pipeworx_grounded for hallucination-resistant single answers, deep_research for broad/multi-part fan-out, and clarifies ask_pipeworx already covers live news.

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.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several families overlap heavily—ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta (explicitly identical today), ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim all answer natural-language questions—and the five polymarket_* tools all circle around detecting or trading edges. However, detailed descriptions and distinct scopes (single vs multi-part vs grounded vs claim verdict, scan vs arbitrage vs fill risk) keep most boundaries usable.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are uniformly snake_case and mostly follow a clear verb_noun or resource pattern (search_articles, compare_entities, list_subscriptions, remember/recall/forget). Minor deviations exist—ask_pipeworx has no underscore and some names are product-prefixed (pipeworx_trending, polymarket_edges)—but the overall pattern is still predictable.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is well above the 25+ threshold, and the set spans unrelated domains—GDELT news, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions, npm dependency scanning, and llms.txt generation—so it feels like several servers mashed together rather than one coherent scope.

Completeness4/5

As a broad read-only data/research toolkit, coverage is strong: ask_pipeworx routes to thousands of sources, entity/compare/recent_changes/validate cover lookups, memory lifecycle is complete, and subscriptions have create/list/read/cancel. Minor gaps exist—no article-level GDELT aggregates beyond the four news tools and no direct update/delete for llms.txt—but there are no critical dead ends.