Skip to main content
Glama
tenkai2018

ai-business-system-advisor-mcp

by tenkai2018

Identify Bottlenecks

identify_bottlenecks
Read-onlyIdempotent

Identifies revenue, operations, customer experience, and trust bottlenecks from business context, returning a public-safe summary.

Instructions

Identifies likely revenue, operations, customer experience, and trust/control bottlenecks from the supplied business context and returns a public-safe summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aiIdeaNoOptional AI or automation idea the user is considering.
metricsNoKnown metrics such as response time, conversion, close rate, cycle time, churn, cost, or error rate.
businessTypeNoType of business being reviewed.
riskConcernsNoConcerns about customer trust, brand risk, money, privacy, compliance, or quality control.
currentProblemNoMain problem or bottleneck the user suspects.
teamPainPointsNoInternal pain points such as repetitive work, slow handoffs, rework, or unclear ownership.
businessContextNoShort description of the business model, customers, offer, team, and operating context.
currentWorkflowNoCurrent workflow steps, handoffs, tools, and review points.
customerComplaintsNoKnown customer complaints, friction points, refunds, or support issues.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confidenceYesConfidence level based on the clarity and completeness of the provided business context.
bottleneckSummaryYesConcise public-safe summary of the most important bottlenecks.
missingInformationYesInformation the user should provide to improve diagnostic confidence.
revenueBottlenecksYesLikely issues that reduce sales, conversion, qualified calls, deal speed, or revenue growth.
mostLikelyRootCauseYesMost likely underlying cause connecting the visible bottlenecks.
operationalBottlenecksYesLikely issues that slow delivery, increase manual work, create rework, or reduce efficiency.
trustControlBottlenecksYesLikely gaps in review rules, approvals, escalation triggers, data boundaries, or quality control.
customerExperienceBottlenecksYesLikely issues that create customer friction, unclear expectations, slow responses, or inconsistent service.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the output is a 'public-safe summary', which provides extra context about the result's nature, beyond what annotations offer.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that covers the core purpose and output characteristic without wasted words. Highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 9 optional parameters and an output schema, the description provides no guidance on which parameters to use or how to interpret results. It lacks completeness for effective agent selection and invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond 'supplied business context', so it adds minimal semantic value over the schema descriptions.

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 verb 'identifies' and the resource 'bottlenecks' across specific domains (revenue, operations, etc.), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze_business_context' or 'map_customer_touchpoints' by focusing on bottleneck identification.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage when business context is available and bottleneck identification is needed, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparisons to sibling tools. No alternatives mentioned.

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/tenkai2018/ai-business-system-advisor-mcp'

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