Skip to main content
Glama
Ownership verified

Server Details

AI-readable directory of local businesses across 8 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.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

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.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 4.1/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

get_place and search_places have clear, non-overlapping purposes: one searches across businesses, the other retrieves a specific record by slug.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (search_places, get_place) using snake_case.

Tool Count2/5

With only 2 tools for a domain covering 8 cities and multiple business types, the tool surface feels too thin; typical CRUD or filtering tools are missing.

Completeness2/5

The set lacks essential operations like listing by category/city, adding reviews, or any CRUD; it covers only search and retrieve, leaving significant gaps.

Available Tools

2 tools
get_placeAInspect

Get the full structured record for one place — any of the 8 Southeast Asian cities — by its Booyah Index slug (from search_places results).

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesThe place slug, e.g. "ongtong-khaosoi-ari-branch-8cszby"
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies a read operation but does not detail behavior such as rate limits, auth requirements, or the structure of the returned record.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence contains all essential information: verb, resource, input, and context. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple lookup with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, input source, and scope.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers the slug parameter with an example. The description adds meaning by explaining the slug's origin (Booyah Index slug from search_places), which the schema does not include.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the full structured record for a single place using a slug, specifying the scope (8 Southeast Asian cities) and distinguishing from sibling search_places which returns a list.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies when to use: after obtaining a slug from search_places. It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

search_placesAInspect

Search the Booyah Index of Southeast Asian local businesses across 8 cities — Bangkok, Singapore, Bali, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Da Nang — 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.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCity filter, e.g. Bangkok, Singapore, Bali, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, Da Nang
limitNoMax results, 1-50 (default 10)
queryYesWhat to look for, e.g. "khao soi", "rooftop seafood"
categoryNoCuisine/category filter, e.g. "Thai restaurant"
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the output structure (ratings, review count, URL) and implies read-only behavior, but does not explicitly state safety or side effects.

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?

Description is a single paragraph, front-loaded with purpose, includes examples and output summary. Efficient with minimal waste.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter usage (via examples), and output. Missing details like case sensitivity or error handling, but adequate for a search tool.

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 the schema already documents parameters. The description adds examples and city context, which is helpful but not transformative beyond schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description specifies the verb (search), resource (Booyah Index of Southeast Asian local businesses), and scope (8 cities, multiple categories). It distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_place' by its search-oriented purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides clear context with examples of effective queries and city filters. Lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is strong.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources