Skip to main content
Glama

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

find_json_structures

Read-only

JSON Structures across the catalog. Data structures behind an API. Filter by q / tags / providers; include=["content"] inlines bodies. Use find_artifacts for cross-type search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoFree text over name + description.
pageNo
sortNoOrder: relevance / provider / name, or property_count (largest first).
tagsNoTag slugs. On PROVIDERS this is identity — what the company says it does, from its own apis.yml. A resource or operation term (webhook, saml, order, oai-pmh) will correctly match no provider; use find_apis?tags= for those, or find_providers?api_tags= to reach companies whose APIs merely touch it.
limitNo
matchNoany
contextNoOptional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.
includeNo
providersNo
struct_typeNoRoot type: object, array, datetime, …

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Previous value: -"Tag slugs. On PROVIDERS this is identity — what the company says it does, from its own apis.yml. A resource or operation term (webhook, saml, order, oai-pmh) will correctly match no provider; use find_apis?tags= for those, or api_tags below."New value: +"Tag slugs. On PROVIDERS this is identity — what the company says it does, from its own apis.yml. A resource or operation term (webhook, saml, order, oai-pmh) will correctly match no provider; use find_apis?tags= for those, or find_providers?api_tags= to reach companies whose APIs merely touch it."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / sort / description
      Previous value: -"Order: name, or property_count (largest first)."New value: +"Order: relevance / provider / name, or property_count (largest first)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / sort / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "property_count"
-]New value: +[
+  "relevance",
+  "provider",
+  "name",
+  "property_count"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Previous value: -"Tag slugs."New value: +"Tag slugs. On PROVIDERS this is identity — what the company says it does, from its own apis.yml. A resource or operation term (webhook, saml, order, oai-pmh) will correctly match no provider; use find_apis?tags= for those, or api_tags below."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds behavioral detail that include=['content'] inlines bodies. This goes beyond the annotation and is useful. No contradictions found.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose, then lists key filters, the include option, and an alternative. No filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter tool with no output schema and many siblings, the description provides the essential purpose and a key alternative, but it omits important details like return format, pagination, and several parameter semantics (e.g., context, struct_type). It is adequate but not thorough.

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 50%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds meaning for include (inlines bodies) and clarifies that filtering by q/tags/providers is possible, but it does not explain context, struct_type, sort, match, or pagination, leaving gaps.

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 clear purpose: finding JSON structures (data structures behind APIs) in the catalog. It also names an alternative tool for cross-type search, which aids differentiation. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar siblings like find_json_schemas, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use find_artifacts for cross-type search,' providing a clear when-not case. It also mentions filtering by q/tags/providers and the include option, which gives basic usage context. However, it lacks guidance on when to prefer this over other find_* tools beyond the single alternative.

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

All apis-io 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