Skip to main content
Glama

LiveDataLink

by io.github.blackboxfoundry

package_track

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify the likely carrier for a package tracking number and return a direct tracking link. Supports common USPS, UPS, FedEx, DHL, and Amazon formats. Live delivery status, location, estimated arrival, and history are not fetched by this tool yet; open the returned carrier link for the current shipment record. Just paste the tracking number - the carrier is detected automatically.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tracking_numberYesPackage tracking number from any carrier

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses important behavior: the carrier determination is 'likely,' only common USPS, UPS, FedEx, DHL, and Amazon formats are supported, and no live tracking data is returned. It also explains the expected next step, opening the returned carrier link, which exceeds what annotations alone provide.

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?

Three sentences each carry distinct value: the tool's purpose, its limitations, and exactly how to invoke it. The most important behavior is front-loaded, and there is no redundant filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and its boundary. The comment about opening the returned link effectively substitutes for an output schema. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The schema fully documents the single parameter as a tracking number, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by stating that the carrier is detected automatically, that only the raw number needs to be pasted, and which carrier formats are supported. This is useful but not substantial enough for a 5.

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 and resource: 'Identify the likely carrier for a package tracking number and return a direct tracking link.' It also delineates what the tool does not do, distinguishing it from status-tracking tools. This is clear and actionable.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description makes usage obvious: 'Just paste the tracking number - the carrier is detected automatically.' It also explicitly warns that live delivery status, location, and history are not fetched, signaling when not to use this tool. It does not name a specific alternative tool, but the exclusion is clear.

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