Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apis-io

by io.apis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_industry

Read-only

One industry: metadata + a top sample of its member providers (ranked, with the total). Use find_providers?industry=slug for the full list, or view=full here. Results carry next: the sub-resources that exist for this entity and the exact tool call that retrieves each, computed from this record. Pass include_next=false to omit it.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesIndustry slug, as find_industries returns it, e.g. "artificial-intelligence".
viewNosummary (default, lean) or full.summary
limitNoTop members to show.
contextNoOptional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong.
include_nextNoSet false to omit the `next` affordance block.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"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."New value: +"Optional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong."
    • changedInput schema / properties / view / description
      Previous value: -"summary (default) returns lean discovery records + *_count for dropped sections; full returns the whole record (use get_api / get_provider for one entity)."New value: +"summary (default, lean) or full."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"Industry slug, as find_industries returns it, e.g. \"artificial-intelligence\"."
  3. 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"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_next
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "Set false to omit the `next` affordance block.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  5. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 25,
+  "description": "Top members to show.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "summary",
+  "description": "summary (default) returns lean discovery records + *_count for dropped sections; full returns the whole record (use get_api / get_provider for one entity).",
+  "enum": [
+    "summary",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: the `next` block enumerates sub-resources and the 'exact tool call that retrieves each, computed from this record', plus how to suppress it. That is real disclosure beyond structured fields; it stops short of describing pagination or the ranking methodology.

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?

Three sentences, heavily front-loaded: identity first, then the routing decision, then the return-shape affordance. No filler or restated title.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return burden and does so: metadata, a ranked top sample with the total, and the `next` affordance block. Combined with 100% schema coverage on the five params, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: 'view=full' is framed as getting the full list here, and 'context' is characterized as never used to rank and read only on wrong results. It does not, however, give any extra detail on limit/slug beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('One industry: metadata + a top sample of its member providers') with scope detail ('ranked, with the total'), which cleanly separates it from find_industries (which lists them) and find_providers (which returns the full provider list). An agent can pick this over its siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative route for the full list ('Use find_providers?industry=slug') versus staying here with 'view=full', giving a concrete when-to-use-this-vs-that decision. It also explains the include_next=false escape hatch, leaving nothing to inference.

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
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources