find_dishes_by_region
Find African dishes associated with a geographic region such as West Africa or Central Africa.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | Yes | African region to search for |
AfriResolve
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only lookup ('Find') and names the entity returned, but it does not disclose edge-case behavior such as empty results, partial matches, or the exact return shape.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence that states the action and scope immediately with no filler or repeated schema information.
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 one-parameter lookup the description is mostly sufficient, but with no output schema it leaves the return format unstated, and it does not route between the closely related sibling tools. A sentence naming the alternative country- or food-based tools would make it complete.
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. The description adds value by giving concrete examples of valid region values ('West Africa or Central Africa') beyond the schema's generic 'African region to search for'.
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 states a specific verb ('Find'), a resource ('African dishes'), and a scoping dimension ('geographic region') with concrete examples ('West Africa or Central Africa'). This makes it distinguishable from siblings like find_dishes_by_country and find_foods_by_region, even without naming 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?
Usage is implied: use this tool when the request asks for African dishes by region. However, it provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mentions overlapping alternatives such as find_dishes_by_country or find_foods_by_region, leaving routing to inference.
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.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5
rank_african_foods and search_african_foods have nearly identical descriptions and field lists, making their boundary unclear. find_dishes_by_country vs find_foods_by_country and find_foods_by_country vs find_foods_by_region also create overlapping selection paths, though the facet descriptions help somewhat.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: find_X_by_Y for faceted lookups, list_african_X for enumerations, resolve_african_X for normalization, and search/rank/get for other operations. There are no mixed naming conventions or camelCase deviations.
Tool Count4/5
Thirteen tools is within a reasonable range for a food and dish knowledge base. However, rank_african_foods and search_african_foods largely duplicate each other, and some find_* variants could be consolidated, so not every tool fully earns its place.
Completeness3/5
The set covers listing, faceted lookup, name resolution, and food search/ranking well, but dishes lack a general keyword search tool equivalent to search_african_foods. There is also no dish category filter, so agents cannot search across all dish metadata without enumerating the full list.