Skip to main content
Glama

trustmrr_category

Read-only

Returns a single TrustMRR category page and the startups listed under it, with verified revenue and MRR figures. slug: Resource slug. Use trustmrr_categories to get TrustMRR categories.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "trustmrr_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesResource slug.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, establishing the safe read-only profile. The description adds useful content context (startups with verified revenue/MRR figures) but says nothing about pagination, result caps, or ordering, so it adds only moderate value over the annotations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in an efficient first sentence. The trailing 'slug: Resource slug.' is redundant with the schema and adds mild waste, but overall the entry is short and well-ordered.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description covers purpose, key return content, and slug sourcing, leaving only minor gaps (pagination/limits) that annotations do not cover.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single 'slug' parameter is already documented. The description merely restates 'slug: Resource slug.' with no added syntax, format, or lookup guidance, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb+resource: it 'Returns a single TrustMRR category page and the startups listed under it, with verified revenue and MRR figures.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling trustmrr_categories (the list/index) and trustmrr_startups.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear context on how to obtain the required input: 'Use trustmrr_categories to get TrustMRR categories,' which tells the agent to fetch the slug from the sibling tool. It does not state any when-not conditions, so it falls short of a full 5.

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.