Skip to main content
Glama

Jisho

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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond: data sources (SEC EDGAR/XBRL, FAERS), handling of off-calendar fiscal years, sorted results, and citation URIs. No contradiction.

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?

Front-loaded with trigger phrases, then core functionality, then type-specific details, then sorting and output notes. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers both entity types, data sources, sorting behavior, and output format (paired data + citation URIs). No output schema, but description sufficiently explains return structure. Complete for a comparison tool of this complexity.

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 schema documents both parameters. Description adds valuable domain context: type='company' pulls specific financial metrics and handles fiscal years; type='drug' pulls FAERS counts. Also clarifies values format with examples and limits.

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 does side-by-side comparison of 2-5 companies or drugs in one parallel call. It uses specific verbs like 'Compare', 'rank', 'head to head' and distinguishes from siblings like entity_profile and lookups by emphasizing parallel execution.

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 states 'ALWAYS PREFER over sequential single-pack lookups when comparing entities' and provides trigger phrases (e.g., 'which is bigger'). It also quantifies the replacement value (8-15 sequential lookups), giving clear when-to-use context.

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

All Jisho 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but there are overlapping tools like the three ask_pipeworx variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) and ai_visibility_check/scan_competitor_ai_presence. A few pairs could cause confusion, but overall differentiation is moderate.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names follow no consistent pattern: some are imperative verbs (remember, forget), some are compound nouns (entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), some are descriptive phrases (recent_alerts, scan_dependency). The verb_noun pattern is absent, leading to inconsistency.

Tool Count1/5

33 tools is far too many for a server named 'Jisho' (a Japanese dictionary), especially since only 2 tools (lookup, search_words) are dictionary-related. The majority of tools belong to an unrelated data platform, making the count wildly inappropriate for the server's apparent purpose.

Completeness3/5

For the dictionary domain, the server lacks common features like example sentences or kanji details. However, the extended tool set covers many data retrieval and analysis tasks, though it is read-heavy with no update/delete capabilities for most resources.

Resources