Retrieve a Y Combinator startup's full profile by company slug or URL, including batch, team size, founders, tech stack, hiring process, and all open job offers.
Devuelve la startup: batch de YC, descripción, tamaño, fundadores, stack, cómo contrata y todas sus ofertas abiertas.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| empresa | Yes | Slug de la empresa (p. ej. givecampus) o su URL /companies/<slug>. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Devuelve" plus a detailed field list implies a read-only, comprehensive fetch, but it says nothing about auth requirements, what happens with an unknown slug, or whether the offer list is truncated/paginated — real gaps for a no-annotation tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One front-loaded sentence that earns its length, since the field enumeration is what tells the agent whether this tool covers its information need. No filler or repetition of the tool name.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description usefully enumerates the returned payload, which is the key missing structured information. A brief note on failure behavior for bad slugs would close the remaining gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, where the schema already explains the slug format and the /companies/<slug> URL alternative. Baseline would be 3, and the description corroborates that the identifier resolves to one startup, so no meaning is lost.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific Spanish verb ("Devuelve") plus the exact resource, then enumerates the returned fields (YC batch, description, size, founders, stack, hiring, open offers). This clearly separates it from detalle-de-oferta, which covers a single offer rather than the whole company. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should be called when company-level context is needed, but there is no statement of when to prefer buscar-ofertas or detalle-de-oferta, and no prerequisite (e.g. requiring a valid slug or session) is mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.