Skip to main content
Glama

Search people

search_people
Idempotent

Find people at firms in the Corridome register by name, title, firm, kind of firm, state and kind of published contact. Returns each person's id, name, title and firm, the kind of document that states their title, and which kinds of contact are published. With include_contacts, it also returns their published business contacts, using one credit from the account's monthly allowance for each contact opened.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoPart of the person's name.
pageNoWhich page of results, from 1.
limitNoHow many results to return, 1 to 50.
stateNoThe US state of their firm's main office, as a two-letter code.
titleNoPart of a title they hold, such as "partner" or "managing director".
firm_idNoOnly people at this firm: its id from search_firms, or its corridome.com address.
firm_kindNoThe kind of firm they work at. adviser: investment advisers registered with the SEC, and exempt reporting advisers. broker-dealer: registered broker-dealers. other: firms known from their own websites and filings.
with_contactNoOnly people with this kind of published contact: email, phone, or any (LinkedIn included).
include_contactsNoAlso return each person's published business contact (email, phone, LinkedIn profile). Each contact opened uses one credit from the account's monthly allowance; a person with no contact, a contact that is only a LinkedIn profile, or one already opened this month uses none.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses the non-obvious cost model in detail: one credit per contact opened under include_contacts, with explicit exemptions (no contact, LinkedIn-only contact, already opened this month) — which also explains why annotations mark readOnlyHint=false despite a search. It also discloses return shape (id, name, title, firm, title-source document, published contact kinds) where no output schema exists.

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 purpose then return/cost information, with no filler. Slightly dense in the second sentence, but every clause carries actionable content.

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?

With nine parameters, no required fields, no output schema, and a credit-consuming option, the description covers what is searched, what comes back, and the billing consequence. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so all nine parameters are already documented, and the description largely restates them at a summary level. It adds a small amount of connective meaning (firm_id sourced from search_firms or a corridome.com address, include_contacts being the credit-consuming path), so baseline 3 is right.

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 ('find people at firms in the Corridome register') and enumerates the filter axes (name, title, firm, firm kind, state, contact kind) plus what is returned. The people-vs-firms-vs-deals distinction from siblings (search_firms, search_deals, get_firm, get_company) is unambiguous from the resource named.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the agent can infer this is the filtered-list tool for people, and firm_id's description points to search_firms as the source of an id. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or guidance on choosing paginated search versus get_firm for a known firm's roster.

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