Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Tulina

by ai.tulina.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

apify_google_maps_places

Businesses on Google Maps for a search in an area — name, address, phone, website, category, rating, review count, opening hours. compass/crawler-google-places.

For a quick look, serper_maps_sample is cheaper; use this one for full place records or a whole city/region (it splits big areas for you).

Returns — the LIST of places (or {error, run_id, status, items}).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "search_terms": "<search_terms>",
      "location": "<location>"
    },
    "name": "apify_google_maps_places"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_orgNoOrg (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
_groupNoÉquipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
fieldsNokeep only these keys, e.g. `["title", "phone", "website", "address"]`.
_run_idNoOBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
_projectNoProjet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
languageNolanguage of the results (`"fr"`, `"en"`).en
locationYesone place in free text, simple is best (`"Marseille, France"`).
_instanceNoInstance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
max_placesNoplaces per search term.
search_termsYeswhat to search (`["bakery", "pastry shop"]`).
with_contactsNoalso read each business website for emails and social links (paid add-on).
max_total_charge_usdNohard cost ceiling of the run, $5 by default, at most your organization's ceiling per run ($25 unless set otherwise).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose non-obvious behavior: it splits big areas automatically, `with_contacts` is a paid add-on, there is a hard per-run cost ceiling, and failures return `{error, run_id, status, items}` rather than throwing. It stops short of describing run lifecycle/polling semantics or permission requirements implied by the `_org`/`_project`/`_run_id` context parameters.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and the field list, then the sibling comparison, then the return shape — a sensible ordering. The telegraphic 'Returns —' fragment and the split-line formatting are slightly rough but cost almost nothing in length.

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?

For a 12-parameter, cost-bearing scraping tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, the key alternative, area-splitting behavior, paid add-on caveat, and the return/error shape. The remaining gap is run-lifecycle and context-parameter (org/project/instance/run_id) guidance, which is handled in the schema but not tied together in prose.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds value by naming the concrete fields available for the `fields` filter (rating, review count, opening hours) and by framing `location`/`search_terms` at the city/region level with automatic area splitting. It does not clarify `max_places` interaction with splitting or the cost ceiling's relationship to `max_total_charge_usd`.

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+resource (businesses on Google Maps for a search in an area) and enumerates the returned fields — name, address, phone, website, category, rating, review count, opening hours. It also names the underlying actor (compass/crawler-google-places), so an agent can distinguish it from the serper_maps_* and osm_pois siblings.

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 routes the agent: `serper_maps_sample` is cheaper for a quick look, this one is for full place records or a whole city/region. That is a concrete when-to-use / when-to-use-the-alternative pair with the deciding condition (record depth and area size) spelled out.

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

All Tulina toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources