Skip to main content
Glama

Country Calling Codes

Server Details

Country calling codes, ISO codes, E.164 dial codes, regions, trunk prefixes, and NANP area codes.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsB

Average 3.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

With a single tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect.

Tool Count4/5

One tool is appropriate for a single-purpose server focused on looking up country calling codes, though it limits functionality.

Completeness4/5

The tool covers lookup by free text, ISO code, dial code, or region, which is sufficient for its stated purpose, but lacks additional features like listing all codes.

Available Tools

1 tool
lookup_country_calling_codeLookup Country Calling CodeBInspect

Look up international country calling codes by free text, ISO code, dial code, or region.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoFree-text search, such as "United Kingdom", "London", or "AUS".
codeNoISO 3166-1 alpha-2 or alpha-3 code, such as GB or GBR.
limitNoMaximum number of countries to return.
regionNoOptional region filter.
dialCodeNoCalling code with or without plus sign, such as +44 or 44.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the core functionality and input types, omitting important details such as whether the tool is read-only, how exact/fuzzy matching works, any rate limits, authentication requirements, or behavior on no results. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate side effects or constraints.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists all search parameters without extraneous words. Every element serves a clear function, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has no output schema, so the description should compensate by explaining the return format or typical response structure. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., a list of countries with calling codes), error handling, or completeness. For a simple lookup, this omission limits the agent's ability to use the output correctly.

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?

Input schema descriptions are comprehensive (100% coverage), so the description adds little beyond summarizing the search methods. It does not provide new semantic nuance or format hints beyond what the schema already states. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's verb (look up) and resource (international country calling codes), and enumerates the search methods (free text, ISO code, dial code, region). It is specific and leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

The description implies when to use it (when a country calling code is needed) but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives. Given no sibling tools, the lack of explicit guidance is acceptable but not exemplary, as it doesn't help the agent decide between this and other potential tools in a broader context.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources