Skip to main content
Glama
PROMPTEYE-SP-Z-O-O

prompteye-mcp

Official
by PROMPTEYE-SP-Z-O-O
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Select the project to work on

select_project
Read-only

Set the active project so subsequent prompteye-mcp tools report visibility, competitors, prompts, answers, and sources without a project argument. Call again to switch projects.

Instructions

Makes one project the active one. Every other tool reports on the active project and takes no project argument, so call this once before asking about visibility, competitors, prompts, answers or sources. Call it again to switch projects mid-conversation.

Brands kept out of competitor rankings are not part of the project payload; read them with list_competitor_exclusions and change them with set_competitor_exclusions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYesId of the project to make active, as list_projects reports it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameYes
brandYes
labelYesGrouping label. null = the project has none.
domainYes
countryYes
createdAtYesWhen the project was created, ISO 8601 in UTC.
accessRoleYesOWNER manages the project, FULL_ACCESS edits it, READ_ONLY reads it.
alternativeDomainsYes
alternativeBrandNamesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.22
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "accessRole": {
+      "description": "OWNER manages the project, FULL_ACCESS edits it, READ_ONLY reads it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "alternativeBrandNames": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "alternativeDomains": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "brand": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "country": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "createdAt": {
+      "description": "When the project was created, ISO 8601 in UTC.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "label": {
+      "description": "Grouping label. null = the project has none.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "name",
+    "brand",
+    "domain",
+    "country",
+    "label",
+    "alternativeBrandNames",
+    "alternativeDomains",
+    "accessRole",
+    "createdAt"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations say readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so an agent knows it is a selector with external scope. The description usefully warns that competitor exclusions are not part of the project payload and must be read/set with the dedicated exclusion tools, which is non-obvious behavioral context. It does not state whether switching clobbers conversation state or what the response contains, though the output schema covers the latter.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short paragraphs, front-loaded with the action, then the calling pattern, then the exclusions caveat. Nothing redundant.

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?

For a one-param selector with an output schema, annotations covering safety, and a documented exclusion caveat, the description gives an agent everything needed to call it correctly in the right sequence.

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?

Schema description for projectId is already 100% covered and tells the agent the id format comes from list_projects. The description adds the semantic that projectId must identify an existing project and that selection mutates per-conversation state rather than accepting further parameters.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: making a project the active one, and explicitly distinguishes this tool's role as a prerequisite for every other context-sensitive tool. The sibling set contains get_active_project, list_projects and create_project, and the description makes clear this is the mutation-based selector, not a reader.

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?

Strongest dimension: it says call this once before asking about visibility, competitors, prompts, answers or sources, and call it again to switch projects. It names the preconditions and the re-call pattern explicitly.

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