Skip to main content
Glama

Trade Intel

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Scan Dependency

scan_dependency
Read-onlyIdempotent

Composite "should I add this npm package to my project" check in ONE call — fans out across deps.dev (license + advisories + version history) and bundlephobia (gzipped/minified bundle size, dependency count, ESM/tree-shake support). Use whenever an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me". Returns a summary block (is_latest, license, published_at, advisory_count, bundle_kb_min, bundle_kb_gz, dependency_count, has_esm, tree_shakeable), per-advisory detail, links, and a list of recent alternative versions. NPM ecosystem only in v1; PyPI / Maven / Cargo / Go fall under deps.dev:version directly. Partial failures degrade gracefully — bundlephobia's first measurement on a new version can take 5-30s; sources_failed will list it if it times out, the rest still returns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packageYesnpm package name. Scoped packages (e.g. "@types/node") are accepted.
versionNoSpecific version to check (e.g., "18.3.1"). Defaults to the latest published version when omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive. The description adds beyond: composite nature (two external services), timing details (5-30s for first bundlephobia measurement), and failure handling (sources_failed list). No contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and use case, then details output and limitations. While slightly lengthy, every sentence adds information; no filler. Structure is logical.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two external sources, partial failures, no output schema), the description covers the return block structure, links, and alternative versions. It provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool returns and its behavior.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying accepted scoped package names and default version behavior, which are not in the schema. This justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 it's a composite check for evaluating whether to add an npm package, covering license, advisories, version history, and bundle size. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being specific to npm package evaluation, with no direct overlap.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use: when an agent asks about safety, popularity, size, or cost of adding a package. Also provides limitations: NPM-only in v1, directs to deps.dev for other ecosystems, and mentions graceful degradation on partial failures.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Trade Intel toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

A número of tools form near- overlapping clusters: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_ipeworx_grounded, and deeep_research all answer questions, while bet_research, polmarget_edges, and polmarget_arbitrage all scan for betting opportunities. The two ask_ipeworx variants are currently identical, and discover_tools vs sgget_questions serve the same discovery role. Long descriptions help but do not remove the misselection risk among 34 overlapping tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools use clear snake_case verb_noun names (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, resolve_entity, subscribe, validate_claim) with helpful domain prefixes like polmarget_* and trade_*. A few standalones like forget/recall/remembber and recent_alerts break the pattern slightly, but the style is largely predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools this exceeds the 25+ threshold and feels overloaded. The surface could be consolidated: four ask_ipeworx variants, five polmarget-specific tools, three memory tools, and three company-profile-style tools carry significant redundancy. Inclusions like generate_lms_txt and scan_dependency also broaden the scope well beyond the Trade Intel mandate.

Completeness4/5

For its broad data-intelligence domain the surface is quite complete: data lookup, grounded fact-checking, entity profiles and comparison, recent changes, prediction-market research with fill-risk verification, trade statistics, memory, and subscription lifecycle all exist with no dead ends. Minor gaps remain (e.g. no dedicated trade time-series other than the US macro dashboard, and no direct tool-listing aside from discover_tools), but agents can work around them.

Resources