Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Population Data

PopulationData
Read-only

Population Data: A country population and demographic data API. Look up any country by ISO code to get its population data, with total population, growth rate, density, urban/rural breakdown, and life expectancy on paid plans. (Cost: 2 credits)

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": {
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "PopulationData"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoSpecific year to retrieve data for (1960-present). Returns latest if not specified.
countryYesISO 2 or 3-letter country code (e.g., US, USA, GB, GBR)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: a 2-credit cost and the fact that several metrics are gated behind paid plans. It does not explain failure behavior for invalid ISO codes, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core verb and resource, then the returned fields and cost. Slight redundancy between the leading 'Population Data' label and the body, but nothing extraneous.

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?

With only two well-documented parameters, an output schema, and complete annotations, the description supplies what remains: what data is returned, plan gating, and credit cost. Only the absence of error/edge-case behavior for malformed country codes keeps it from a 5.

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%, with both 'country' and 'year' fully documented in the schema, including the 1960-present range. The description reinforces the ISO-code input but adds no format or semantics beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Look up any country by ISO code to get its population data') and enumerates the returned metrics, so the tool's purpose is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from near siblings such as CountryLookup, GDPData, or ZIPDemographics, which is the only thing keeping it below a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternative tools for country statistics. The only scoping hints are incidental ('on paid plans', '2 credits'), which speak to cost rather than tool selection.

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

All APIVerve 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