Skip to main content
Glama
phillipkaraya

rageval-mcp

compare_methods

Read-onlyIdempotent

Benchmark retrieval methods side by side at cutoff k. Compare recall, precision, MRR, and nDCG@k to identify the best strategy for your RAG pipeline.

Instructions

Benchmark every available retrieval method side by side at cutoff k.

The honest, defensible answer to "which retrieval strategy should we use?". Each method
is scored over the full labeled question set and ranked by nDCG@k. Methods whose optional
dependencies are missing (currently only 'dense') are reported under ``skipped`` with a
reason rather than failing the whole call.

Args:
    k: The cutoff applied to recall@k, precision@k, and nDCG@k (1 to 20, default 3).

Returns:
    CompareResult with fields:
        - k (int), n_questions (int)
        - rows: list of {method, recall_at_k, precision_at_k, mrr_at_k, ndcg_at_k}
        - best_method (str): the runnable method with the highest nDCG@k
        - skipped: list of {method, reason} for methods that could not run.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kNoCutoff k applied to every metric.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kYes
n_questionsYes
rowsYes
best_methodYes
skippedYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context by noting that methods with missing dependencies are reported under 'skipped' with a reason rather than failing, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 description is well-structured with Args and Returns sections, and is mostly concise. However, the first sentence includes somewhat marketing-like phrasing that could be trimmed without loss of clarity.

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?

Given the presence of a comprehensive output schema and annotations, the description fully explains input, behavior, and output. It covers how skipped methods are handled and lists all return fields, making it complete for an agent to use effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the only parameter 'k' is fully documented in the schema. The description repeats the schema's description and default but adds no new semantic meaning, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool benchmarks every available retrieval method side by side at cutoff k, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like evaluate_retrieval and retrieve by focusing on comparative benchmarking.

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?

The description explicitly frames the tool as 'the honest, defensible answer to which retrieval strategy should we use', indicating when to use it. It also handles missing dependencies gracefully, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it versus alternatives.

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/phillipkaraya/rageval-mcp'

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