Skip to main content
Glama

NYCfoodie

by app.railway.up.nycfoodie-production
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

compare_restaurants

Read-only

Compare 2–5 named restaurants head-to-head as structured data (rating, price, tags, review summary). Use when the user asks to choose between specific places, e.g. 'should I go to X or Y?' or to compare four options on a budget.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoAlias for restaurants
cityYesCity slug, always required. Currently 'new-york', covering the five boroughs plus the immediate metro (within 30 km of Manhattan).
restaurantsNoRestaurant ids or names to compare

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for restaurants",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 5,
+  "minItems": 2,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / restaurants / maxItems
      Previous value: -3New value: +5
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "restaurants",
-  "city"
-]New value: +[
+  "city"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / city / description
      Previous value: -"City slug, always required. Currently 'new-york'."New value: +"City slug, always required. Currently 'new-york', covering the five boroughs plus the immediate metro (within 30 km of Manhattan)."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to cover side effects. It adds value by specifying the return fields (rating, price, tags, review summary), which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotation. It doesn't mention error conditions or pagination, but for a read-only comparison tool this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core function and output, followed by usage guidance. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description explains what and when, but leaves a critical gap: the schema requires only 'city' yet the description implies restaurants are needed. It doesn't clarify which parameter to use ('ids' vs 'restaurants') or what happens if only city is provided. Given no output schema, this ambiguity could lead to incorrect 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters; it only repeats the concept of 'named restaurants' without clarifying the relationship between the 'ids' and 'restaurants' array fields, which is ambiguous.

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 states a specific verb ('Compare'), a resource ('2–5 named restaurants'), and the output format ('structured data (rating, price, tags, review summary)'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_restaurant (single) and search_restaurants (search) by focusing on head-to-head comparison.

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?

Provides explicit usage scenarios: 'when the user asks to choose between specific places' with concrete examples. It tells the agent exactly when to invoke this tool, which is sufficient for selection among siblings.

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

All NYCfoodie 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