Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Delightful's Game Research Starter Pack

by com.thisisdelightful
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

search_techniques

44 search techniques for games research, each with a query you can paste, what it surfaces and why it works. Includes local-language strategies for researching the Japanese, Korean and Chinese markets without reading the language. Use this before searching the open web on a games question — these are the queries that reach material a plain search buries.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoYour question in your own words, for example "what are Japanese players saying about a launch". Techniques are ranked by how many of its words they mention, so a whole question works better than one keyword.
marketNoTechniques for this market, plus the ones that apply everywhere.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "UK",
-  "DE",
-  "IN",
-  "BR",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia",
-  "BE"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "UK",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "DE",
+  "IN",
+  "BR",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia",
+  "BE"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "UK",
-  "DE",
-  "BR",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "IN",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia",
-  "BE"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "UK",
+  "DE",
+  "IN",
+  "BR",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia",
+  "BE"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "UK",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "DE",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "BR",
-  "IN",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia",
-  "BE"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "UK",
+  "DE",
+  "BR",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "IN",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia",
+  "BE"
+]
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "UK",
-  "DE",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "BR",
-  "IN",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia",
-  "BE"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "UK",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "DE",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "BR",
+  "IN",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia",
+  "BE"
+]
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "UK",
-  "DE",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "BR",
-  "IN",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "UK",
+  "DE",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "BR",
+  "IN",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia",
+  "BE"
+]
  6. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Free text over the technique and how it works."New value: +"Your question in your own words, for example \"what are Japanese players saying about a launch\". Techniques are ranked by how many of its words they mention, so a whole question works better than one keyword."
  7. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "US",
-  "Global",
-  "JP",
-  "KR",
-  "UK",
-  "Not market specific",
-  "DE",
-  "FR",
-  "CN",
-  "MENA",
-  "IT",
-  "SEA",
-  "CA",
-  "Nordics",
-  "BR",
-  "IN",
-  "MX",
-  "ES",
-  "TR",
-  "NL",
-  "AU",
-  "PL",
-  "TW",
-  "EU",
-  "LATAM",
-  "Asia"
-]New value: +[
+  "US",
+  "Global",
+  "JP",
+  "KR",
+  "Not market specific",
+  "UK",
+  "DE",
+  "FR",
+  "CN",
+  "MENA",
+  "IT",
+  "SEA",
+  "CA",
+  "Nordics",
+  "BR",
+  "IN",
+  "MX",
+  "ES",
+  "TR",
+  "NL",
+  "AU",
+  "PL",
+  "TW",
+  "EU",
+  "LATAM",
+  "Asia"
+]
  8. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers the most important behavioral fact: the output is techniques with queries and rationales, not search results or answers. It also discloses that coverage includes non-English market strategies, which an agent could not infer otherwise. It does not discuss result limits, ranking of techniques (only the schema mentions that), or whether the catalog is static.

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?

Three tight sentences, with the payload (44 techniques and their anatomy) front-loaded and the usage trigger last. Slightly promotional phrasing ('the queries that reach material a plain search buries') costs a little precision but is not padding.

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 tool is simple (two optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), and the description covers what it returns, why it is useful, and when to call it. An agent can invoke it correctly without further reading. Nothing about result size or how to consume the techniques afterwards is stated, though that is a minor gap for a read-only lookup.

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 both parameters are already fully documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds a little context for the market parameter by explaining that local-language strategies exist for JP, KR and CN, but it says nothing about the free-text query beyond what the schema already states about ranking by word overlap.

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 concretely states what the tool returns: a set of 44 search techniques, each with a pasteable query, what it surfaces, and why it works. That makes clear it is a technique catalog rather than a live search, which is the crucial distinction. It does not name or rule out any sibling (search_sources, get_source, get_market, list_trends, get_landscape), so sibling differentiation is only implied by 'before searching the open web.'

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?

Explicit timing guidance is given: 'Use this before searching the open web on a games question,' which frames the tool as a pre-search step. A specific use case (researching the JP/KR/CN markets without language skills) is also named. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or naming which sibling to pick instead once techniques are in hand.

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

All Delightful's Game Research Starter Pack toolsInspect
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