Skip to main content
Glama

Research Row

research_row
Read-onlyIdempotent

Claygent-style per-row research: answer ONE question about ONE company and return a JSON object matching your output_schema, with every field wrapped in its own evidence — {value, evidence_url, quote, status}. status is NEVER self-reported by the model: "found" means this code independently verified the model's quote is a VERBATIM substring of text actually fetched; "inferred" means a value was given but the quote could not be verified; "not_established" means no source answered the field, and its value is always null — never guessed, never a blended score. Sources: "web" fetches the company's own site (entity.domain required — homepage, /about, /leadership) via fetch_url; "catalog" checks entity_profile (SEC EDGAR; resolved:false for a private company is expected, not a failure); "both" (default) tries both. max_cost (USD, default 0.02, max 0.50) scales how many pages are fetched and refuses up front if it is too small to pay for even one extraction call (floor $0.002) — never silently overspends. A row where every source comes back empty costs nothing: every field is mechanically not_established with NO model call made. For a boolean/derived field (e.g. "does this company sell to healthcare"), the quote only has to SUPPORT the value — a descriptive sentence about customers/products counts, the source need not state the answer verbatim. leadership_page_status ("fetched"|"not_found"|"not_attempted", plus leadership_note) says plainly whether a leadership/team page was actually read, so a named-person field (head_of_sales) coming back not_established is distinguishable from "this company just doesn't publish one" vs. "we never checked". model_output_empty:true means the model returned nothing usable (a transport/budget problem) — every field is not_established for THAT reason, never read as 20 individual "no" judgments. Use with a fixed question + schema across many rows for "Claygent over N companies with a hard cost cap" (composes with batch callers). For picking from a fixed label list instead of extracting open fields, use classify_row (cheaper, one model call).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entityYesThe row/company to research. At least one of name/domain required.
sourcesNoWhere to look: "web" (company site only), "catalog" (entity_profile only), "both" (default).
max_costNoCost ceiling in US dollars for this one row. Default 0.02, max 0.50, minimum viable 0.002 (below that the call is refused rather than silently exceeding it).
questionYesThe question to answer about this company, in natural language, e.g. "Does this company sell to healthcare, and who is the head of sales?"
output_schemaYesJSON Schema object naming the fields to extract, e.g. {"properties":{"sells_to_healthcare":{"type":"boolean"},"head_of_sales":{"type":"string"}}}. Up to 20 fields.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only and open-world annotations, the description discloses the evidence verification model, status semantics, cost refusal behavior, zero-cost empty-source behavior, and failure signals like model_output_empty. It also distinguishes a legitimately absent leadership page from a page that was never checked.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core operation and evidence contract. Every sentence carries useful information, though the single long paragraph could be easier to scan if split by source, cost, and status behavior.

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 complex, multi-source research tool with no output schema, it covers return shape, verification statuses, cost caps, source behavior, and common failure modes. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly and interpret ambiguous-looking results.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Even though the schema already documents parameters, the description adds operational meaning: max_cost scales page fetching and is refused below a floor rather than overspent, web requires entity.domain, and output_schema fields are wrapped in value/evidence_url/quote/status.

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 states a specific verb and resource, answering one question about one company and returning evidence-wrapped JSON. It clearly distinguishes the tool from classify_row and explains that the output matches a caller-supplied schema.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool: fixed question plus schema across many rows with a hard cost cap, and when to use the alternative classify_row for fixed-label classification. It also explains source-selection conditions for web, catalog, and both.

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.