Skip to main content
Glama

LiveDataLink

by io.github.blackboxfoundry

earthquake_recent

Read-onlyIdempotent

Recent earthquakes from USGS. Filter by region (lat/lon + radius), state name, magnitude threshold, or time window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNo
lonNo
limitNoMax events (default 50).
end_timeNoISO datetime upper bound (default now).
locationNoAddress, zip, city, or 'lat,lon' to center the search. Optional.
radius_kmNoSearch radius around lat/lon (max ~20000).
start_timeNoISO datetime lower bound (default 30 days ago).
min_magnitudeNoMinimum magnitude (default 2.5).

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the USGS source and filter categories but does not disclose default time windows, geocoding behavior, or result shape. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler; it efficiently packs source and filter categories. It loses a point because 'state name' is somewhat misleading in light of the actual parameters.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema and no required parameters, the description gives enough filter axes to attempt a basic call. However, it does not explain defaults, the output list shape, or how this tool relates to usgs_earthquake_feed and usgs_earthquake_search, making it adequate but not complete.

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 description coverage is high (75%), so the schema already explains most parameters. The description adds useful grouping (lat/lon + radius, time window, magnitude threshold), but it also references 'state name' without a matching explicit schema field and does not add syntax details beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the resource ('Recent earthquakes from USGS') and the main filter dimensions, so an agent can tell this is a read-only earthquake listing tool. It does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like usgs_earthquake_feed or usgs_earthquake_search, and the mention of 'state name' does not map cleanly to a schema parameter.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Given the nearby sibling tools usgs_earthquake_feed and usgs_earthquake_search, the description gives an agent no basis for choosing between similar earthquake-related tools.

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

All LiveDataLink 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools overlap heavily across domains: caselaw_search vs court_case_search vs court_opinion_search, caselaw_citation_lookup vs court_citation_resolver, and a cluster of company due-diligence tools (company_trust_check, counterparty_risk_score, entity_dossier, issuer_diligence_dossier, kyb_aml_evidence_case_file) that all screen a company for sanctions/risk/standing. With 290 tools, an agent will frequently face multiple equally plausible choices for the same user intent.

Naming Consistency3/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clean domain-prefix + snake_case pattern (census_, eia_, fmcsa_, npi_, cfpb_, etc.), but there are notable exceptions: entity_resolve and resolve_entity are reversed duplicates, reg_search (Federal Register) sits next to reg_cfr_search (CFR) with confusingly similar names, and carrier_monitor_recheck deviates from the carrier_vetting_* family.

Tool Count1/5

290 tools is an extreme count under any rubric, far exceeding even the 50+ threshold for the lowest score. While the group-filtering mechanism and meta-tools like list_tool_groups and search_available_datasets mitigate the practical burden, the raw surface is still massively oversized for an agent to select from accurately and efficiently.

Completeness4/5

For a read-only data-aggregation server, coverage is remarkably comprehensive across 59 domains, and generic fallbacks like cdc_dataset_query, eia_series_lookup, fred_observations, and bls_series prevent most dead ends. Minor gaps exist (a single GitHub tool, demo-only property_lookup coverage, no write/update operations anywhere), but the stated data-access purpose is well served.

Resources