Skip to main content
Glama
teodorofodocrispin-cmyk

intelica-mcp

by teodorofodocrispin-cmyk
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Hybrid

analyze_competitor

Analyze any competitor URL or text description to get structured JSON with positioning, pain points, and market gaps. Perfect for competitive research.

Instructions

Analyzes a competitor's URL or text description and returns structured competitive intelligence as JSON.

Cost: $0.05 USDC per call, paid automatically via x402 on Base mainnet. Response time: 2-5 seconds (first call), <1 second (cached within 6 hours).

Returns a JSON object with these fields:

  • company_or_product (str): Identified name of the company or product

  • positioning_summary (str): 2-3 sentence description of market positioning

  • target_customer (str): Primary customer segment being targeted

  • core_value_props (list[str]): Top 3 value propositions

  • user_pain_points (list[str]): Top 3 problems users experience

  • detected_competitors (list[str]): Up to 6 detected competitors

  • unique_angle (str): One specific differentiator or exploitable gap

  • tone (str): Brand tone — "professional", "casual", "technical", or "aggressive"

  • confidence (str): Analysis confidence — "high", "medium", or "low"

Parameters:

  • url: Full URL of the product or company to analyze (e.g. "https://notion.so"). The server fetches and parses the page automatically.

  • text: Raw text description to analyze (alternative to url). Minimum 50 characters for reliable results.

  • context: Optional context about your own product or use case. Example: "I'm building a note-taking app for developers." Providing context improves the relevance of unique_angle.

At least one of url or text is required.

Example usage:

  • analyze_competitor(url="https://linear.app")

  • analyze_competitor(text="Figma is a collaborative design tool for product teams")

  • analyze_competitor(url="https://notion.so", context="Building a wiki tool for engineers")

Note: Results are cached for 6 hours. Repeated calls for the same input return instantly at the same price.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo
textNo
contextNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses cost, response time, caching, and output structure. It also specifies constraints like minimum text length and the need for at least one of url or text.

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?

Well-structured with sections and bullet points, but slightly verbose. Could be tightened without losing 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?

Covers all aspects: input options, constraints, output fields, caching, cost, and timing. No gaps given the tool's complexity and presence of output schema.

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%, but the description explains each parameter in detail, including examples, conditions (e.g., minimum 50 chars for text), and the optional context parameter. Adds substantial meaning beyond the schema types.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it analyzes a competitor's URL or text description and returns structured competitive intelligence. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Provides examples, caching behavior, and required input conditions. However, lacks when-not-to-use or direct comparison to alternatives like batch_analyze.

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/teodorofodocrispin-cmyk/intelica-mcp'

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