DaedalMap Population Estimates
Server Details
Global population estimates from WorldPop, 2000-2030, at country and sub-national levels.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- xyver/daedal-map
- GitHub Stars
- 3
- Server Listing
- daedal-map
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored. Lowest: 3.4/5.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: listing available packs (get_catalog), retrieving detailed metadata for a pack (get_pack), and executing queries on a dataset (query_dataset). There is no functional overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent 'verb_noun' pattern using snake_case, making them predictable and easy to understand.
With only 3 tools covering discovery, metadata, and querying, the set is tightly scoped and each tool serves a necessary function without redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full user workflow: discover available packs, inspect a pack's details, and query the data. No obvious gaps for a read-only data access server.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_catalogGet CatalogARead-onlyInspect
Free discovery. Returns the list of live agent-ready data packs available on DaedalMap.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's claim of returning data is consistent. It adds context by specifying the returned items are 'live agent-ready' and from 'DaedalMap', but does not describe pagination, limits, or output structure beyond a list.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose ('Free discovery') and immediately specifying the return value. Every word contributes.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema, one sibling tool type), the description adequately covers the purpose. However, it could be improved by hinting at the relationship with get_pack (e.g., 'Use this to browse available packs, then get_pack to retrieve a specific pack').
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has 0 parameters, so by baseline the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The description mentions 'Free discovery' which aligns with no inputs, but no additional value is needed beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'list of live agent-ready data packs available on DaedalMap', distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_pack' (which likely retrieves a single pack) and 'query_dataset' (which queries dataset content).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'Free discovery' implies a browse/search use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (get_pack, query_dataset). No 'when not to use' is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_packGet PackARead-onlyInspect
Free discovery. Returns detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples for one pack. Call this before querying a new pack so you can see time shape, coverage limits, and the paste-ready first query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pack_id | Yes | Pack identifier such as 'currency', 'earthquakes', 'floods', 'hurricanes', 'tornadoes', 'tsunamis', 'un_sdg', 'volcanoes', 'world_factbook', or 'worldpop'. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral insight such as 'free discovery', coverage limits, and including a paste-ready first query, which enhances transparency beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences: first states what is returned, second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with purpose and key information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: return content, usage context, and hints about output. With full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description is complete for agent invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and already lists valid pack_id values. The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond 'for one pack', so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool returns detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples for one pack. It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing its preparatory role before querying data.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly advises to call this before querying a new pack to learn about time shape, coverage limits, and the first query. This provides clear when-to-use context and implies alternatives like query_dataset.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
query_datasetQuery DatasetBRead-onlyInspect
Generic structured query for direct source_id or pack_id access using the same contract as POST /api/v1/query/dataset. Free packs: boundaries, currency, distributed_manufacturing, floods, geography, nri, owid, reverse-geocoding, un_sdg, un_wpp, volcanoes, world_bank_wdi. Paid packs: earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, wildfires, world_factbook, worldpop (x402 Base USDC).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | Optional sort instructions for row-returning queries. | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of rows to return for the requested source or pack. | |
| output | No | Optional output controls such as response format hints. | |
| filters | No | Structured filters including time, region_ids, and compare clauses. | |
| metrics | No | Metric ids to return. Use event_count for aggregate counts when supported. | |
| pack_id | No | Pack identifier such as 'currency', 'earthquakes', 'floods', 'hurricanes', 'tornadoes', 'tsunamis', 'un_sdg', 'volcanoes', 'world_factbook', or 'worldpop'. | |
| source_id | No | Concrete source id such as 'earthquakes_events', 'volcanoes_events', 'hurricanes_events', or 'un_sdg/01'. | |
| request_id | No | Optional caller-supplied request id for tracing and idempotency. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by detailing free vs paid packs, implying potential cost for paid packs. It also references the underlying API contract. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or behavior when neither source_id nor pack_id is provided.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise (5 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently packs essential information about packs and the endpoint. Minor improvement could be adding line breaks for readability.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
While the description covers pack categories and the query contract, it omits crucial context such as the required presence of either source_id or pack_id (both are optional in schema) and output format expectations. Given the complexity (8 params, no output schema), completeness is adequate but not thorough.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description redundantly lists pack_id values but does not add meaningful new information beyond the schema. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool performs a 'generic structured query' for 'direct source_id or pack_id access', specifying verb and resource. It lists supported packs, which helps distinguish from sibling tools like get_catalog. However, it does not explicitly state the return format, leaving some ambiguity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implied usage context is provided by mentioning direct source_id/pack_id access and the endpoint contract. The listing of free vs paid packs hints at cost considerations. However, no explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool over get_catalog or get_pack, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.