dataset_topThe highest (or lowest) rows of the Requly dataset by a numeric column — "which is the most/least X".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| column | Yes | ||
| ascending | No | true for the lowest first; default highest first |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the ranking behavior but does not explicitly mention read-only nature, side effects, or limitations beyond what schema shows. It does not contradict, but adds minimal transparency beyond the obvious.
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?
One clear, concise sentence with a helpful example. No redundancy.
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?
Covers the core functionality and use case. Lacks details on return format or edge cases, but for a simple ranking tool it is adequate. No output schema exists, so not required.
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 description clarifies that the column must be numeric and that ascending means lowest first, which partially covers the schema gap (only ascending had description). It does not explain 'limit' but that is self-explanatory. Adds useful meaning.
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?
States a specific verb ('rank') and resource ('rows') by a numeric column, and gives an example. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like dataset_search or dataset_stats.
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?
Provides a clear use case ('which is the most/least X') but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when not to use. The intent is implied but not directly contrasted.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct query mode: schema discovery, provenance, exact lookup, substring search, ordered multi-value comparison, numeric statistics, and ranking. dataset_row and dataset_search overlap slightly for exact-match cases, but their descriptions clarify the intended use.
All tools consistently use the dataset_ prefix with lowercase snake_case and clear operation names. Minor grammatical inconsistency like dataset_row for plural rows and dataset_top instead of top_rows is present, but the pattern is still predictable.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a dataset exploration server. Each tool covers a distinct question type without redundancy or bloat.
The surface covers schema discovery, provenance, exact/pattern matching, numeric stats, and ranking, which handles most common dataset questions. Missing operations like distinct-value listing or grouped aggregation are minor gaps, not blocking ones.