Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

search_chapters

GET /search/chapters — Search chapters

Search DC chapters by city or country name.

Query syntax (q=): plain words match with prefix + typo tolerance. Wrap a phrase in double quotes to require an exact ordered match — e.g. q="remote work". AND/OR/NOT/parentheses are NOT parsed in q= — use the structured filter params below for boolean composition.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch text. Required.
pageNo1-indexed page number.
limitNoMax hits per page (1-100).

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

In the absence of annotations, the description explains search behavior (prefix matching, typo tolerance, exact phrase matching, boolean not supported). This adds significant transparency beyond the schema. However, it does not mention potential rate limits or result count limits beyond pagination.

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 5 sentences, front-loads the tool's purpose, and provides necessary detail without redundancy. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers input behavior and query syntax. It misses a note about the response format (e.g., list of chapters with IDs), but for a search tool, the input documentation is sufficient.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by detailing the query syntax for the 'q' parameter, which goes beyond the schema's simple 'Search text' description. Page and limit parameters are briefly covered but repeat defaults.

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 identifies the tool as searching chapters by city or country name. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_events and search_profiles by specifying the resource (chapters) and the search criteria (city/country).

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 provides query syntax guidelines but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The mention of 'structured filter params' is misleading since no such params exist in the schema, but overall the usage context is clear.

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