Skip to main content
Glama

Rank rows by a numeric column

dataset_top

The highest (or lowest) rows of the Xlifflane dataset by a numeric column — "which is the most/least X".

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "column": "<column>"
    },
    "name": "dataset_top"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
columnYes
ascendingNotrue for the lowest first; default highest first

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions highest/lowest ordering but does not explain what a returned row looks like, how ties are handled, what the default limit is, or whether full rows or just the ranking column are returned. This is a significant gap for a ranking tool.

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?

The description is a single, short sentence that front-loads the core action. The appended quote 'which is the most/least X' is somewhat redundant, but overall the description has no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It omits return value format, default limit behavior, tie-breaking, and error conditions, so an agent may call it correctly but cannot anticipate results reliably.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, with only 'ascending' having a description. The description adds that 'column' must be numeric and clarifies highest/lowest ordering, but it does not explain the 'limit' parameter's meaning or default behavior. It only partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool ranks rows by a numeric column and identifies highest/lowest rows, which is a specific verb-resource pairing. It is distinct from sibling tools like dataset_search or dataset_stats, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

The usage context is implied: use this when you want the most/least values of a numeric column. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool would be a better alternative for other ranking or filtering needs.

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.

Resources