Search the AfriResolve African food knowledge base across names, aliases, categories, countries, regions, descriptions, uses, and nutrition information.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search text for discovering African food records |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"New value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description indicates the action is a read-only search but does not disclose result format, pagination, limits, or error behavior. With no annotations provided, some behavioral details are missing, though the core search behavior is clear.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, compact sentence that conveys the purpose and scope without unnecessary words or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description gives sufficient context for a simple search tool, but it does not mention output shape or any constraints such as maximum results. Given its simplicity and clear scope, this is adequate though not exhaustive.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema description for the 'query' parameter is basic ('Search text for discovering African food records'), but the main description adds meaningful context by specifying that the query applies across names, aliases, categories, countries, regions, descriptions, uses, and nutrition information.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Search' and the specific resource 'AfriResolve African food knowledge base', and enumerates the fields searched (names, aliases, categories, countries, regions, descriptions, uses, nutrition). This distinguishes it from the more specific find/list/resolve sibling tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies a general cross-field search use case, which contrasts with the more targeted sibling tools (e.g., find_by_country, list_african_foods). However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over those alternatives, so guidance is slightly implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
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.
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.
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.
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.