The Wheel Atlas

Search wheels

search_wheels

Search wheels with filters. At least one filter is required. Covers currently-available wheels unless include_discontinued is set; every result carries "Available". Returns up to 20 results per call.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_wheels"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	No	Discipline: Road, Gravel, TT, Triathlon, XC, Trail, Gravity, Downhill
`brakes`	No	Disc or Rim
`company`	No	Manufacturer name (partial match)
`currency`	No	USD, EUR, GBP or AUD; returns wheels priced in that currency
`max_price`	No	Maximum RRP in USD
`min_price`	No	Minimum RRP in USD
`max_weight`	No	Maximum pair weight in grams
`min_weight`	No	Minimum pair weight in grams
`uci_approved`	No	Filter by UCI approval
`max_rim_depth`	No	Maximum front rim depth in mm
`min_rim_depth`	No	Minimum front rim depth in mm
`include_discontinued`	No	Also search the discontinued archive (specs are kept after wheels are withdrawn)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It responsibly discloses the default availability filter, the effect of include_discontinued, the 20-result cap, and the 'Available' marker. It does not mention ordering or pagination, but the disclosed behaviors are meaningful and accurate.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and immediately followed by the most important usage constraints. No wasted words or redundant restatement of parameter names.

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?

For a 12-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical operational details: required filter, default availability scope, result cap, and result marker. It is missing some useful context such as result ordering and whether pagination exists, but the stated information is sufficient for correct first invocation.

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 input schema already documents every parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by stating that at least one filter is required and by clarifying the default behavior tied to include_discontinued. This is helpful semantic context not present in the schema itself.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Search wheels') and conveys that it is a filter-driven catalog lookup. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like compare_wheels or get_wheel_price, but the name and framing make the distinction clear enough.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives useful constraints: at least one filter is required, and the default scope excludes discontinued wheels unless include_discontinued is set. However, it provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead of the sibling tools or when a sibling would be more appropriate.

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

All The Wheel Atlas tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?