Skip to main content
Glama

pickanagency

by io.github.Natden444

Search marketing agencies

search_agencies
Read-only

Search Pick an Agency's directory of 47,000+ marketing agencies. Filter by free-text query, service (e.g. SEO, paid ads, social media), country, city, industry, and minimum rating. Returns the top matches with location, rating, reviews and profile link. WHEN TO USE: for browsing or filtering ('show me SEO agencies in Berlin', 'agencies named X') when the user wants a LIST to explore. Use match_agencies instead when the user describes their project/brief and wants a RECOMMENDATION; use get_agency for full detail on one specific agency.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCity, e.g. 'Berlin', 'New York'.
limitNoMax results (default 10).
queryNoFree-text search (agency name, keyword).
countryNoCountry, e.g. 'United States', 'France'.
serviceNoService, e.g. 'SEO', 'Social Media Marketing', 'Paid Advertising'.
industryNoIndustry focus, e.g. 'SaaS', 'Healthcare'.
min_ratingNoMinimum overall rating (0-5).

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds context about return fields (location, rating, reviews, profile link) and the directory size, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with clear opening, filter list, and usage guide in caps. Slightly verbose but front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 7 parameters all described in schema, no output schema, and annotations present, the description adds directory size, return field details, and usage guidance. Minor omission: no mention of default sort order.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description mentions some filter types but does not add substantial new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses specific verb+resource ('Search Pick an Agency's directory') and distinguishes itself from siblings by stating when to use search_agencies vs match_agencies or get_agency.

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 states 'WHEN TO USE' for browsing/filtering, and contrasts with match_agencies for recommendations and get_agency for specific agency details.

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

All pickanagency toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: browsing/filtering, matching based on brief, and fetching full profile. Descriptions clearly differentiate when to use each, leaving no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All three tool names follow the consistent verb_noun pattern (get_agency, match_agencies, search_agencies) using snake_case, making them predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count4/5

Three tools is on the lower end but appropriately covers the core workflow of agency discovery: searching, matching, and retrieving details. No tools are missing for the apparent scope.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the main user flow (search, match, get detail) for an agency directory. Minor gaps like listing all services or updating entries exist but are likely out of scope.

Resources