Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unilytics MCP Server

Unilytics MCP Server

Official
by TeamUnilytics
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get_competitor_changes

Read-only

Retrieve changes detected on a monitored competitor site, newest first, using stable event IDs to distinguish new updates from repeated polls. Supports pagination and stopped monitors.

Instructions

Read changes detected on one of the user's monitored competitor sites, newest first.

Each change has a stable `event_id`, so repeated polls can be told apart from
new changes. An empty result means no changes detected yet; the first scheduled
run may still be in progress, and check_competitor_now starts a run immediately.
Works on stopped monitors too (their past changes).

Args:
    monitor_id: ID returned by watch_competitor() or list_competitor_monitors().
    limit: Max changes per page (1-12; a larger value returns 12). Default 12. A long change
        summary is shortened to 4,000 characters and marked change_truncated.
    cursor: Pagination cursor from a previous call's `next_cursor`.

[Provider: Parallel AI]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo
monitor_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: newest-first ordering, stable event_id for deduplicating repeated polls, empty-result semantics, stopped-monitor behavior, the 12-item clamp, and the 4,000-character truncation with a change_truncated marker. It stops short of describing the change object's other fields or pagination termination.

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?

The opening sentence front-loads purpose and ordering, and the Args block is scannable. Some detail is redundant or borderline (the truncation note sits under limit rather than a returns section), but no sentence is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description must cover returns, and it does partially: event_id, change_truncated, and next_cursor are all named. It omits what other fields a change record contains, which leaves an agent guessing about the payload shape.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: monitor_id is tied to watch_competitor()/list_competitor_monitors(), limit gets a documented range (1-12), default, and silent clamping behavior, and cursor is sourced from a previous call's next_cursor. These are constraints and provenance details the schema does not express.

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 and resource ('Read changes detected on one of the user's monitored competitor sites') plus a default ordering ('newest first'). This cleanly separates it from siblings like check_competitor_now (triggers a run) and list_competitor_monitors (lists monitors, not changes).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives conditional routing for the important edge case: an empty result may mean the first scheduled run is still in progress, and 'check_competitor_now starts a run immediately' names the alternative to use. Also clarifies it works on stopped monitors. Lacks a general statement of when to poll versus when to force a check outside that empty-result case.

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