Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openpitch-mcp

openpitch-mcp

by Avierovich
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

what_moved

Read-onlyIdempotent

Tracks material changes, contradictions, and entries/exits in AI startup metrics since a given date.

Instructions

Material changes, contradictions, and universe entries/exits since a date.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "what_moved"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sinceNo
min_confidenceNo
include_contradictionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. Description adds only the temporal filtering ('since a date'), but discloses no additional behavioral traits such as data scope or impact.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, no wasted words, but at the cost of omitting important details. Adequately concise but not optimally structured.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 3 optional parameters, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description fails to provide sufficient context about return values or parameter effects.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema has 3 parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). Description only implicitly references the 'since' parameter, omitting min_confidence and include_contradictions entirely.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it lists material changes, contradictions, and universe entries/exits since a date, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_events and get_provenance. However, 'material changes' is somewhat vague.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_events or get_provenance. The description does not mention when-not-to-use or provide context for selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools