Skip to main content
Glama
hermoso-ai

Hermoso

Official
by hermoso-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Competitor teardown

competitor_teardown

Turn a competitor's ads into an actionable playbook: hook mix, repeat themes, white space, counter-plays, and territories to avoid. Pass raw ads or auto-pull their Meta ads.

Instructions

Tear a competitor's ad strategy down into an actionable playbook: their opening-hook MIX, longest-running campaign THEMES, the WHITE SPACE nobody in their set runs, 2-3 render-ready COUNTER-PLAYS, and the territories they own that you should avoid. Pass competitor {name, domain?}. CONTRACT: supply ads (raw ad objects from a prior pull_competitor_ads / search_meta_ads call) to tear exactly those down, OR omit ads and this pulls the competitor's real Meta ads first (spends a credit or two, longest-running = proven winners). Auto-tailors the white space + counter-plays to YOUR saved brand. Spends credits (free when you pass ads).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
adsNoad objects to tear down (from pull_competitor_ads / search_meta_ads). Omit to auto-pull their Meta ads first.
languageNooutput language (default English)
competitorYesthe competitor to tear down

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.161
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "adCount": {
-      "description": "how many ads were analyzed",
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "teardown": {
-      "description": "the playbook — hook_taxonomy, campaigns, white_space, counter_plays, not_saying"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal a non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive call, and the description adds materially: it spends credits, is free when ads are passed, and auto-pulls Meta ads otherwise. It does not describe failure modes or auth requirements, keeping it short of a 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-loads the outcome, then the CONTRACT, then the credit note. The all-caps emphasis is slightly noisy and the sentence is dense, but nearly every clause adds actionable information.

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?

For a complex, non-read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the deliverables, the input contract, and the cost. It is largely self-sufficient, missing only explicit mention of what a failed/empty auto-pull returns.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: `ads` is defined as raw ad objects from a prior pull and tied to the tear-down contract, and `competitor` {name, domain?} is explained with domain sharpening the auto-pull match.

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 (tear down) and resource (competitor ad strategy), and enumerates the concrete outputs: hook mix, campaign themes, white space, counter-plays, and owned territories. This is clearly distinguishable from every sibling, including the ad-pull tools it depends on.

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?

Gives an explicit contract: pass `ads` from a prior pull_competitor_ads/search_meta_ads call, or omit to auto-pull. Names the two upstream siblings by name and explains the consequence of each path (credit spend vs. proven winners).

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