Skip to main content
Glama

Twitch

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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: describes data sourced (SEC EDGAR/XBRL, FAERS), handling of off-calendar fiscal years, sorting by primary metric, and return format (paired data + citation URIs). No contradiction with readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.

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 well-structured with usage triggers at the start, functional details in the middle, and efficiency claims at the end. Some redundancy (e.g., mentions parallel call and replaces sequential lookups twice) but overall each sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a tool with 2 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers input semantics, data sources, sorting, and return format. Could mention limitations (e.g., only public companies, only FDA drugs) but is otherwise thorough.

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 description enriches parameters by explaining that 'type=company' pulls revenue/net income/cash/debt and 'type=drug' pulls FAERS counts, approval counts, trial counts. Also clarifies the 'values' array expects tickers/CIKs for companies and names for drugs.

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 it performs side-by-side comparisons of 2-5 companies or drugs, using specific verb 'compare' and resource 'entities'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'entity_profile' and 'validate_claim' by emphasizing parallel lookups vs sequential, and specifies data sources (SEC EDGAR for companies, FAERS for drugs).

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 'ALWAYS PREFER over sequential single-pack lookups when comparing entities', and provides natural language examples for invocation (e.g., 'X vs Y', 'rank these companies'). Implicitly guides against using when a single entity lookup suffides (use entity_profile instead).

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

All Twitch 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

The tool set includes many similar Pipeworx query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, ask_pipeworx_beta, deep_research) that all serve overlapping purposes, causing confusion. The Twitch-specific tools are distinct but are buried among many unrelated tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case (e.g., get_streams, ask_pipeworx), but there is variation in patterns: some are verb_ noun (get_streams), some are just verbs (remember), and some are adjective_noun (recent_changes). No strong pattern across the whole set.

Tool Count2/5

With 35 tools, the server is bloated for its stated purpose as a 'Twitch' server. Only about 4-5 tools are Twitch-related; the rest are from a data platform (Pipeworx) and generic utilities, making the count feel excessive and unfocused.

Completeness2/5

For a Twitch server, the tool surface is severely incomplete. It lacks essential Twitch features like clips, follows, chat, or channel management. The few Twitch tools present cover only basic stream and user lookup.

Resources