Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-evangelist

by com.apievangelist
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

find_entities

Read-only

Browse the demand-side entity catalog — every service, tool and standard companies are measured against, ranked by how many carry it. Free. This is the left-hand side of the inversion: pick an entity here, then call entity_demand to see WHO.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSubstring match on the entity name.
kindNoEntity kind: "service", "tool" or "standard".
pageNoPage number, 1-based (default 1). Use with `limit` to walk a long list.
limitNoResults per page, 1-100 (default 25).
contextNoOptional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.
min_companiesNoOnly entities carried by at least this many companies.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Added value: +"Entity kind: \"service\", \"tool\" or \"standard\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Results per page, 1-100 (default 25)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Added value: +"Page number, 1-based (default 1). Use with `limit` to walk a long list."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that results are ranked by company coverage and that access is free, but says nothing about result volume, pagination behavior or what a page of entities looks like beyond the schema's page/limit fields.

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?

It is short and front-loads the resource and ranking rule. The 'left-hand side of the inversion' phrasing is insider jargon that costs a sentence of clarity without much payoff, keeping it from a 5.

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 read-only browse tool with no output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose, ordering and the natural follow-up call. It is slightly thin on what the response contains, but annotations carry the safety profile and the schema carries the parameters.

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 all six parameters (q, kind, page, limit, context, min_companies) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or filtering nuance beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (browse) and resource (demand-side entity catalog) covering services, tools and standards, plus the ordering rule (ranked by company count). It does not fully separate itself from near-name siblings like find_services, find_tools and find_measured_standards, which an agent might reasonably confuse with this combined catalog.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It sketches a workflow ('pick an entity here, then call entity_demand to see WHO') and notes the tool is free, which implies when to reach for it. But it never states when NOT to use it, nor how it relates to the many find_* siblings that appear to cover overlapping territory.

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

All api-evangelist toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources