Skip to main content
Glama

InfraNode

by dev.infranode

City Base Data

get_city
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get base data for a German city (population, area, coordinates).

Sourced from Wikidata. Read-only. Useful as a first lookup to confirm a city exists and get its core attributes. For a broader question about the city (what data is available at all) use get_city_overview instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesCity identifier, e.g. 'berlin' or 'hamburg'. Resolved leniently: the German name with or without umlauts, any casing, a common English exonym or short form also works (München/munich/munchen -> muenchen, cologne -> koeln, frankfurt -> frankfurt-am-main). An unknown name returns 404 with a 'Meintest du ...?' suggestion. list_cities gives the canonical slugs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
metaYes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds value by stating the data source ('Sourced from Wikidata') and explicitly calling out the read-only nature, which aligns with and reinforces the annotations (readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false). However, it doesn't disclose further behavioral traits like what happens on error or if the city is not found, though the parameter schema does mention a 404 response with suggestions. The core safety profile is well-covered by annotations, so the description provides adequate context without being overly redundant.

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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. The first sentence clearly states the purpose and core data delivered. The second paragraph is front-loaded with the most critical context (data source, read-only) immediately after. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, 100% schema coverage, clear annotations, and an output schema for return values), the description is complete enough. It covers what the tool does, its data source, its scope, and when to use an alternative. The output schema handles the return values, so the description doesn't need to explain them.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with a detailed description of the 'slug' parameter including lenient resolution rules and examples. The description itself doesn't add significant meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('base data') and explicitly lists the returned fields (population, area, coordinates). It distinguishes itself from its sibling 'get_city_overview' by stating this is a 'first lookup' for core attributes vs. a broader overview.

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?

The description provides clear guidance on when to use this tool ('first lookup', 'confirm a city exists') and explicitly states when not to use it ('for a broader question... use get_city_overview instead'). It also mentions the data source and read-only nature.

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

All InfraNode 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is potential confusion between 'get_city_resource' and specific resource accessors like 'weather', 'air_quality', 'transit_departures', 'station_board_arrivals', and 'station_board_departures'. The descriptions do clarify that some specific tools exist for convenience or source-specific details, but the boundary isn't always sharp. Also, 'compare' could overlap with using 'get_city_resource' repeatedly. An agent might hesitate between using the generic resource accessor and the named tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is mostly consistent: verbs like 'get', 'list', 'compare', and 'pois' (abbreviation) are used. The pattern is generally 'verb_noun' (e.g., 'get_city', 'list_cities', 'station_board_arrivals'). Minor deviations include 'pois' being an acronym rather than a full verb phrase, and 'air_quality' vs 'weather' implying a noun rather than an action. But overall it's predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is a well-scoped count for a city data platform. The function set covers discovery (list_cities, sources), overview (get_city_overview), base data (get_city), specific data types (weather, air_quality, transit_departures, station_board_*, pois), a generic accessor (get_city_resource), and a comparison tool (compare). Each tool feels necessary and the set is not overwhelming.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is quite comprehensive for a read-only city information server. It provides discovery (list_cities, get_city_overview), base data, and access to 81 data types via get_city_resource. The named tools cover the most common queries (weather, air quality, transit). A minor gap is the lack of a tool to aggregate or search across cities (though 'compare' helps). Editing or write operations are not expected here, but for read-only, it's nearly complete.

Resources