Skip to main content
Glama

search_broadcast_transcripts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search every word spoken on KAZM's airwaves — weather reports, local news, live talk breaks, and syndicated shows, machine-transcribed from the station's own broadcast tapes. The archive begins July 2026 and grows four blocks a day, forever. Commercials and PSAs are never archived. Times are Arizona (Phoenix, UTC-7). Pairs with search_song_history: that tool answers what was PLAYED, this one answers what was SAID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoLimit to one broadcast day, YYYY-MM-DD
limitNoMax matches to return (default 25, max 100)
queryYesWords to search for in the spoken-word archive, e.g. 'fire restrictions' or 'doctor'
typesNoComma-separated segment types to search: talk (KAZM's own voice — weather, news, breaks), show (syndicated programming), live (live broadcasts), music (words captured over songs). Default 'talk,show,live'.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: data source (broadcast tapes), machine-transcription, archive scope, and timezone. This is more than annotations provide, but it doesn't discuss rate limits or result pagination.

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?

Three concise sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose and content, archive details and exclusions, timezone and sibling comparison. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main action.

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?

The description covers domain, data sources, exclusions, timezone, and relationship with sibling. Given no output schema, it could have mentioned return format or pagination behavior, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minor value by giving example queries and implicitly explaining the 'types' parameter through listed segment types, but mostly repeats schema information.

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 searches spoken words on KAZM's airwaves, lists specific content types (weather, news, talk, shows), and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool search_song_history by contrasting 'SAID' vs 'PLAYED'.

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 provides context like archive start date, growth rate, exclusion of commercials/PSAs, and timezone. It references the sibling tool to guide choice. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond the one sibling.

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.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Tools are mostly distinct across categories (radio, local info, spiritual, listener management), but there is notable overlap: get_emergency_alerts and get_nws_alerts both provide alerts, and get_or_create_listener overlaps with register_listener. Also, get_chakra_frequencies, get_chakra_guide, and get_solfeggio are very similar. While descriptions help differentiate, agents may still struggle to select the right tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names consistently use lowercase snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_weather, submit_song_request, log_listener_history). The verbs are predictable (get, search, submit, log, register, update) and there are no deviations like camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count2/5

With 45 tools, the set is overgrown for a radio station server. Many tools are hyper-specific (e.g., separate tools for chakra frequencies, guide, and solfeggio; moon phase, sun times, and stargazing conditions). Consolidating similar functions would reduce cognitive load and improve coherence.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers a broad range: radio operations, listener management, local news/weather, outdoor guides, spiritual content, etc. However, there are notable gaps: no tool to fetch full news articles (only headlines), no way to manage show schedules, and no donation or station info tools. Also, listener profile management is split across multiple tools, which feels incomplete.