Booyah Index
Server Details
AI-readable directory of 3,500+ local businesses across 14 Southeast Asian cities.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
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 4.5/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: get_place retrieves a specific place by slug, list_cities lists all cities with counts, and search_places allows query-based discovery. No ambiguity or overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_place, list_cities, search_places. Predictable and easy to understand.
With only 3 tools, the set is lean but appropriately scoped for a focused read-only index of places. It covers the core operations needed to discover and retrieve data.
The tools cover search and retrieval, but there is no way to browse all places in a city or filter by category without a search query. list_cities only returns counts, not actual places, which could leave gaps for agents wanting to explore systematically.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_placeGet placeARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Get the full structured record for one place — any of the 14 Southeast Asian cities — by its Booyah Index slug (from search_places results).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The place slug, e.g. "ongtong-khaosoi-ari-branch-8cszby" |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds context beyond annotations: specifies source of slug (search_places results) and domain (14 Southeast Asian cities). Annotations already provide readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive hints.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no extraneous 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?
Complete for a simple retrieval tool: describes purpose, input, domain. No output schema needed as annotations cover behavior.
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 covers slug with example. Description adds meaning by linking slug to Booyah Index and search_places, enhancing schema description.
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?
Clearly states the verb 'get', resource 'full structured record for one place', and scope 'any of the 14 Southeast Asian cities'. Distinguishes from siblings by specifying slug from search_places results.
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?
Implies a workflow: use search_places first to get slug, then get_place. Provides clear context but no explicit when-not or alternatives statement.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_citiesList citiesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
List every city covered by the Booyah Index with its place count. Call this first if unsure which city name to pass as the city filter in search_places — avoids guessing at spelling or coverage.
| 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 and idempotentHint; the description adds that it returns city names and place counts, which is useful behavioral context beyond the 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, no wasted words; front-loaded with action and output, then practical usage advice. Highly efficient.
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?
For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains output (city list with place count) and usage context, making it complete for an AI agent.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%; the description adds value by referencing the 'city' filter of a sibling tool, aligning with the parameter context.
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 tool lists every city covered by the Booyah Index with place counts, and distinguishes from siblings by explaining its role as a prerequisite for search_places.
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 instructs to call this first when unsure about city names for search_places, providing clear when-to-use guidance and avoiding guesswork.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_placesSearch placesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Search the Booyah Index of Southeast Asian local businesses across 14 cities — Bangkok, Singapore, Bali, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Da Nang, Chiang Mai, Pattaya, Koh Samui, Koh Phangan, Phnom Penh, Yangon — restaurants, bars, spas, clinics, coffee, coworking & more, for the best matches to a query (e.g. "best khao soi in Bangkok", "rooftop bar in Singapore", "omakase in Thonglor"). Returns structured records: what each place is known for, rating, review count, and a canonical URL to cite.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | No | City filter, e.g. Bangkok, Singapore, Bali, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Da Nang | |
| limit | No | Max results, 1-50 (default 10) | |
| query | Yes | What to look for, e.g. "khao soi", "rooftop seafood" | |
| category | No | Cuisine/category filter, e.g. "Thai restaurant" |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) already confirm safe read-only behavior. The description adds beyond by detailing the output structure (name, rating, review count, URL) and the scope (14 cities, categories). No contradictions.
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 sentence covers action, scope, and examples; second describes output. No redundant words, front-loaded with key action. Efficient and clear.
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 no output schema, the description compensates by specifying exact return fields (structure, rating, review count, URL). All 4 parameters are described. Sibling tools are listed but not explicitly differentiated in usage, though context is clear. Overall, sufficient for agent to use correctly.
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% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds value by providing a comprehensive list of cities and example categories, which enriches the parameter meaning beyond the schema. The examples for query and city are helpful.
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 searches the Booyah Index for Southeast Asian local businesses across 14 cities, specifying the verb 'search', the resource (Booyah Index), and scope (14 cities, categories like restaurants, bars, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings as a broad search vs get_place (single place) and list_cities (city listing).
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?
Description provides rich examples of queries and lists all cities and categories, giving context for when to use. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., if you have a specific place ID, use get_place instead). This is a minor gap.
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!