Skip to main content
Glama

List bike parks

list_venues
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the bike parks (venues) that have public Shreddy clips: name, city, state, how many clips and how many measured rides, the runs and features there, and a link. Filter by query (matches name, city or state) or sort nearest first with near (coordinates; for a place name like "San Diego", pass its approximate latitude and longitude). Distances come in km and miles. Use it for "what parks do you have" and to learn valid venue names.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nearNoSort by distance from this point (decimal degrees). For a city, pass its approximate coordinates.
limitNoHow many venues to return (1 to 25, default 25).
queryNoFree text matched against venue name, city and state, e.g. "bradley" or "CA".

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
venuesYes
messageYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / city / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / city / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / distance_km / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "number"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / distance_km / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "number",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / distance_mi / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "number"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / distance_mi / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "number",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / state / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / venues / items / properties / state / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious behavior beyond that: only venues with public clips appear, distances are returned in both km and miles, and `near` requires numeric coordinates even for place names.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, then filtering behavior, then the usage cue. The enumeration of return fields is dense but every clause carries information an agent needs and there is no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; annotations cover safety. The description still supplies the scoping constraint, filter semantics, and unit behavior, leaving nothing an agent needs to call this three-optional-parameter tool correctly.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage the baseline is 3, and the description largely restates the schema: query matches name/city/state and near takes coordinates. The only added nuance is that place names must be geocoded to lat/long, which the schema also hints at, so it adds little beyond structured data.

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 and resource ("List the bike parks (venues)") and narrows scope to those with public Shreddy clips. It also names the returned fields and a distance-sorting behavior, which lets an agent distinguish it from get_venue (one venue) and search_clips without opening any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ("what parks do you have") and a secondary purpose ("learn valid venue names"), which is valuable guidance for a discovery tool. It does not name when to prefer a sibling such as search_clips instead, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources