Skip to main content
Glama

Chercher un refuge / Find a shelter

chercher_refuges
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find animal shelters near a French town or postcode, nearest first, with address, phone, website, what each one offers and what it needs (volunteers, foster families, food). Use it to adopt, help or contact a shelter. Returns up to 20 shelters, each with its public page. Accepts French or English; replies in French, or English with langue "en".

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": {
      "commune": "<commune>"
    },
    "name": "chercher_refuges"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offreNoKeep shelters that say they offer this: tous (all, default), adoption, accueil_urgence (emergency shelter), conseils (advice), aide_alimentaire (food aid), sterilisation (neutering aid) or trappage (trapping).tous
besoinNoKeep shelters that say they need this: tous (all, default), benevoles (volunteers), familles_accueil (foster families), nourriture (food), materiel (supplies), dons (donations) or transport.tous
langueNoResponse language: "fr" (French, default) or "en" (English). A request written in English is answered in English even without it.fr
limiteNoHow many shelters to return, nearest first (whole number, 1 to 20, default 10).
communeYesFrench town name or 5-digit postcode (string, 2 to 80 characters), e.g. "Nemours" or "77140". Searches around the town centre. France only.
rayon_kmNoSearch radius in km around the town centre (number, 1 to 100, default 50).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
totalYesShelters found within the radius, before the limit.
centreYesNull when the town is not found or is outside France.
refugesYesUp to 20 shelters, nearest first.
a_savoirYesA caution to pass on: details come from public directories and may have changed.
annuaireYesThe full directory on the site.
rayon_kmYesThe radius searched, in km.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: nearest-first ordering, a hard cap of 20 results, each with a public page link, and automatic language detection so an English request returns English even without 'langue'. It does not disclose what happens when a postcode matches nothing or whether results are truncated silently.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the search scope and result contents, then usage, then return limits and language. Minor friction: 'Returns up to 20 shelters' sits alongside a schema default of 10, which can read as the default page size rather than the ceiling.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description covers geography, ordering, caps and language handling for a read-only search. The remaining gap is edge-case behaviour (no matches, out-of-France input, radius with no results), which for a low-risk lookup tool is acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so all six parameters, three enums and the bounds are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds little beyond restating the language behaviour already present in the 'langue' schema text ('Accepts French or English; replies in French, or English with langue "en"') and does not explain how 'offre' or 'besoin' filter against shelters that leave the field blank.

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?

A specific verb and resource are stated ('Find animal shelters near a French town or postcode') and the payload is enumerated: address, phone, website, offerings, needs. It implies the distinction from listing-style siblings like chercher_annonces or chercher_adoptions by framing the result as shelter contact records, but it never names an alternative, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

'Use it to adopt, help or contact a shelter' gives a concrete intent-based entry condition, which is more than implied usage. It lacks any when-not guidance or explicit pointer to a sibling (e.g. chercher_missions_benevolat for volunteer listings only), which keeps it below a 5.

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