Venture Insights Concept Diagnostic

Open the free-diagnostic intake form

open_diagnostic_intake

Read-only

Show the founder an interactive intake form to start their FREE Concept Diagnostic. PREFER calling this over asking for the founder's name, email and concept one message at a time — it collects everything in one card and starts the diagnostic on submit. Call it as soon as the user wants to start, or check the viability of, an idea. The form is deliberately collected FRESH from the founder and starts BLANK — it does NOT accept or pre-populate remembered details, so the founder always enters (and sees) their own name, email and concept. This keeps the destination email accurate (one free diagnostic per founder, emailed to the address they type). Takes no arguments.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`form`	No	Always 'diagnostic_intake'.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds valuable context: form starts blank, does not accept/remember details, ensures email accuracy. No contradictions.

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 relatively long but front-loaded with key action and preference. Every sentence adds value, though could be slightly tighter.

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?

Fully explains purpose, when to use, behavioral details, and outcome. With output schema present, no gaps.

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?

No parameters; schema coverage 100%. Description adds no param details but none needed. Baseline 4 for zero-param tool.

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?

Clearly specifies verb (open/show), resource (interactive intake form), and distinguishes from siblings like start_free_diagnostic by emphasizing it's a form collection step.

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 when to call (as soon as user wants to start or check viability) and provides a preference over step-by-step questioning. Also notes what it does NOT do (pre-populate), guiding appropriate use.

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

All Venture Insights Concept Diagnostic tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

The tools have distinct purposes, but open_diagnostic_intake and start_free_diagnostic overlap in initiating the diagnostic. open_diagnostic_intake presents a form and 'starts the diagnostic on submit', while start_free_diagnostic directly sends a confirmation email, making it ambiguous which to call first. Descriptions help, but an agent could misselect.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (check_diagnostic_status, describe_services, open_diagnostic_intake, start_free_diagnostic). No deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is a well-scoped number for the free diagnostic workflow. Each tool serves a necessary step: describe, intake, start, and poll status. No redundancy or missing steps for the core flow.

Completeness3/5

The set covers the free diagnostic flow (describe, intake, start, status) but omits any tools for the paid services mentioned in describe_services. Also, the relationship between open_diagnostic_intake and start_free_diagnostic is unclear, creating a potential gap in the flow.

Resources

Need Help?