Skip to main content
Glama

esgpulse

Get AI-powered ESG intelligence for CSRD compliance, EU Taxonomy alignment, emissions analysis, greenwashing risk detection, and disclosure guidance.

Instructions

ESGPulse: AI-powered ESG and sustainability intelligence: CSRD compliance roadmaps, EU Taxonomy alignment, supply chain due diligence, emissions analysis, greenwashing risk, and ESG disclosure guidance. All end

Coverage: Global

Endpoints: • csrd ($0.25): CSRD compliance roadmap • framework ($0.15): ESG framework navigator • company ($0.15): Company ESG intelligence • emissions ($0.15): Carbon and emissions intelligence • sector ($0.15): SASB sector ESG materiality • taxonomy ($0.20): EU Taxonomy alignment check • supply-chain ($0.20): Supply chain ESG due diligence • score ($0.10): ESG score intelligence • greenwashing ($0.15): Greenwashing risk detector • disclosure ($0.20): ESG disclosure builder

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoPrimary reporting goal
langNoResponse language (ISO 639-1)
focusNofocus
raterNorater
scopeNoscope
topicNotopic
actionYesWhich endpoint to call. Options: csrd | framework | company | emissions | sector | taxonomy | supply-chain | score | greenwashing | disclosure
claimsNoSustainability claims to analyze (e.g. 'carbon neutral by 2030, eco-friendly packaging')
entityNoCompany or entity name (optional)
formatNoformat
listedNoWhether the company is publicly listed
sectorNoIndustry sector (retail, manufacturing, financial-services, technology, energy, healthcare, etc.)
companyNoCompany name (e.g. Apple, Unilever, HSBC)
activityNoSpecific economic activity (e.g. solar energy generation, manufacture of cement)
turnoverNoAnnual turnover in EUR (e.g. 250000000 for €250M)
employeesNoNumber of employees (e.g. 500, 5000)
frameworkNoframework
objectiveNoEU Taxonomy environmental objective to assess
entity_typeNoentity_type
company_typeNoType of organization
jurisdictionNoCompany's primary jurisdiction
origin_countriesNoComma-separated list of sourcing countries (e.g. CN,BD,VN)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only lists endpoints and prices, but does not describe side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or whether operations are read-only/destructive. Insufficient transparency.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is verbose, includes pricing details that may be unnecessary, and appears truncated ('All end'). It is not front-loaded or concise.

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?

Despite 22 parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain how endpoints relate, what output format to expect, or how to choose between endpoints for a given task. The tool is complex but the description is incomplete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage (all 22 parameters described in JSON), baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the endpoint list; parameter details are already in the schema.

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?

The description clearly identifies the tool as AI-powered ESG intelligence, listing specific endpoints (CSRD, taxonomy, etc.) that distinguish it from sibling pulse tools. However, the truncation 'All end' and mixed pricing details slightly reduce clarity.

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?

Endpoint names imply usage scenarios (e.g., csrd for compliance roadmaps), but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when not to use it. The description lacks when/when-not instructions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/GTCC777/mcp-pulsenetwork'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server