Skip to main content
Glama

Kroger

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"]).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses data sources (SEC EDGAR/XBRL for companies, FAERS/FDA/clinical trials for drugs), handling of off-calendar fiscal years, sorting by primary metric, and return of paired data with citation URIs. Annotations already indicate safe, read-only behavior, and description adds rich context without contradiction.

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?

Description is somewhat lengthy but front-loaded with trigger phrases and each sentence provides distinct value. Could be slightly more concise, but remains efficiently structured.

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 entity types, data sources, sorting, return format, and replaces many sequential lookups. Without output schema, description adequately explains what the tool returns (paired data + URIs).

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?

Input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. Description adds practical examples (tickers/CIKs for company, drug names) and explains the meaning of values in context of the comparison, enriching beyond schema.

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?

Description states explicit purpose: side-by-side comparison of 2–5 companies or drugs in one parallel call. Provides trigger phrases ('compare X and Y', 'X vs Y', 'which is bigger') and distinguishes from sequential lookups.

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 advises to always prefer this tool over sequential single-pack lookups. Gives clear context for when to use company vs drug type, and explains the data pulled for each.

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

All Kroger 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes (e.g., ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, bet_research all query data), making it hard for an agent to choose the correct one. Additionally, entity_profile and compare_entities both provide company profiles, adding further ambiguity.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names are inconsistent: some use verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities), some noun_verb (entity_profile), and some are single verbs (forget, recall). There is no clear pattern, and the mix of styles (e.g., kroger_*, polymarket_*, pipeworx_*) adds confusion.

Tool Count3/5

34 tools is on the higher end, but the server covers a broad domain (grocery, data query, betting, subscriptions). However, the presence of multiple similar query tools (e.g., three ask_pipeworx variants) inflates the count unnecessarily, making it feel bloated.

Completeness3/5

For its stated Kroger grocery focus, the tools (search, details, store locator) are complete. However, the server also includes many unrelated tools (betting, entity profiles, subscriptions) that feel tacked on, leaving gaps in coverage for the non-Kroger domains (e.g., no tools for user management or other store chains).

Resources