Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

datasets_pitchbook_companies_item

Fetch a PitchBook company from a dataset by ID to get its profile, industry, financing, ownership, headquarters, employees, and deal details.

Instructions

Get a PitchBook company from dataset. Returns one PitchBook company from the dataset by id, such as 752821-12. The record has name, description, status, primary industry, financing and ownership status, headquarters, founding year, employees, investor count, latest deal type, website, FAQs and data tables. An unknown id returns 404.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPitchBook company id, e.g. 752821-12

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it enumerates the returned record fields (financing, ownership, HQ, employees, investor count, tables) and discloses that an unknown id returns 404. It omits any auth, rate-limit, or pagination context, which keeps it short of 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the id format, then the return contents, then error behavior. The long field enumeration is informative rather than filler, though it could be tightened into a more scannable list.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey the return shape, and it does by listing the record's fields and the 404 failure mode. Nothing critical for correct invocation is missing; only cross-tool routing guidance is absent.

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 coverage is 100% and the single `id` parameter is already documented with the same example in the schema, so the description adds little beyond repeating 'such as `752821-12`'. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (PitchBook company) with the key scoping detail 'by `id`', which distinguishes it from the sibling datasets_pitchbook_companies_search and _facets that operate by query. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so an agent still has to infer the split.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'by `id`' — you need a known id — but the description never says to run the search tool first to obtain one, nor states any when-not conditions. Adequate but with a clear gap for a lookup that depends on a retrieved identifier.

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