Skip to main content
Glama

sponsorable

by com.sponsorable

Find Sponsors for a Show

find_sponsors_for_show
Read-onlyIdempotent

Given a podcast's name or RSS feed URL, return the brands detected sponsoring it, falling back to brands active in the show's categories when few exact sponsors are found. Each result carries a short reason. Use this for "who would sponsor my show?" questions; it identifies one show per call and does not browse the podcast catalog. Without a linked account, results cover publicly listed sponsors only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
showNoThe podcast's name
feed_urlNoThe podcast's RSS feed URL (exact match; use when known)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
showYes
exact_sponsorsYes
similar_sponsorsYes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds behavioral context beyond annotations: falling back to category sponsors, each result carries a short reason, and the account-linked limitation. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint).

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 that front-load the core function and fallback, followed by result characteristics and usage hints. 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?

Covers input modes, fallback, result content, limitations (no browsing, account-linked), and usage scenario. Output schema exists, so return values are handled there. Complete for a query tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that either parameter can be used and the fallback logic, but it does not introduce new parameter details beyond the schema.

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 verb 'return brands' and the resource 'podcast via name or RSS feed URL'. It also explains the fallback behavior when exact sponsors are few, distinguishing it from siblings like 'search_sponsors' or 'get_sponsor'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use: 'who would sponsor my show?' questions. Provides constraints: one show per call, does not browse catalog, and notes the limitation about linked accounts for sponsor coverage.

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

All sponsorable toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes. Overlap exists between search/search_sponsors and fetch/get_sponsor, but descriptions clarify the different use cases (deep-research compatibility vs. full structured queries). Overall, an agent can reliably differentiate tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

The naming convention is predominantly verb_noun (e.g., create_list, get_sponsor), but two tools (fetch, search) are single verbs without a noun, breaking consistency. This introduces minor confusion about their scope.

Tool Count4/5

17 tools is a reasonable number for a podcast sponsorship database, covering search, retrieval, list management, and contact operations. It's not overly heavy nor too thin for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers primary operations: searching sponsors/podcasts, retrieving details, managing lists, and handling contacts. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to update sponsor data, but that's likely read-only), but core workflows are well-supported.

Resources