Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

rooms_browse

GET /rooms/browse/:type — Browse public channels by type

Browse publicly-joinable rooms of a given type that you are NOT yet subscribed to. The same surface the in-app Browse Channels modal shows. DC BLACK rooms are filtered out for DC tier members.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesRoom type to browse. Allowed: `channel`, `discussion`, `quick-question`.
limitNoMax results (1-100)
cursorNoCursor from a previous response's `nextCursor`. Pass to fetch the next page.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly implies a read operation (GET) and mentions filtering behaviors. However, it lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or the absence of destructive effects.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the endpoint and purpose. Every sentence provides value with no redundant information.

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?

The description covers usage context (room type, subscription status, DC BLACK filter) but does not describe the return format or pagination behavior, which is important given the cursor parameter and absence of an output schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema for parameters; only 'type' is referenced in context.

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 verb 'browse' and the resource 'publicly-joinable rooms by type'. It explicitly notes that it returns only rooms the user is NOT subscribed to, distinguishing it from other room tools like rooms_subscribe_create or rooms.

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 indicates when to use this tool (to discover rooms not yet subscribed to) and notes filtering of DC BLACK rooms. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like rooms (which lists subscribed rooms) or rooms_subscribe_create.

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

All DC Member API 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Despite the large number of tools, each has a detailed description that clearly distinguishes its purpose. Minor potential overlaps (e.g., search vs. resource-specific search, own vs. other's agenda) are well documented, so an agent can differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or resource_subresource_action pattern in snake_case. A few tools are just nouns (e.g., 'alerts', 'announcements'), but these are top-level listing endpoints; overall the naming is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

85 tools is very high for a single server, making it difficult for an agent to efficiently explore and select the right tool. While each tool seems justified for the broad domain, the count feels overwhelming and could be streamlined.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers most major areas (events, trips, chapters, rooms, search, profile, etc.) with CRUD or lifecycle operations. However, the lack of a 'send message' tool for rooms is a notable gap, and some resources (e.g., events) are read-only on creation/update, limiting agent workflows.

Resources