Skip to main content
Glama

Islam West Africa Collection (IWAC)

by io.github.fmadore

List audiovisual materials

list_audiovisual
Read-onlyIdempotent

List audiovisual materials, newest first (francophone web video from Burkina Faso, Togo and Benin; deposited Nigerian Hausa/Arabic recordings). Filter by country, publishing channel or source_type.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoDefault 20, max 50
offsetNo
countryNoExact country name: Benin | Burkina Faso | Côte d'Ivoire | Niger | Nigeria | Togo (accents optional). Burkina Faso, Togo, Benin and Nigeria only — no Niger or Ivorian items
publisherNoSubstring on the publishing channel/broadcaster, e.g. RTB | AEEM | CERFI
source_typeNoyoutube (harvested web video, the large majority) | deposited (recordings with a file, 47)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by explaining the default sort order ('newest first'), the specific geographic origins, and the distinction between 'youtube' and 'deposited' source types, which go 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main purpose ('list audiovisual materials, newest first') and appends filter options. Every word is informative with no redundancy, earning its place.

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 the high schema coverage (80%), annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, sort order, scope, and filters. It lacks mention of pagination behavior beyond schema parameters (limit/offset are present in schema), but this is minor. Complete for a list tool.

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 (80%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning the filterable fields (country, publisher, source_type) which map to schema parameters, but does not elaborate on their syntax beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., exact country names, substring match for publisher). No additional semantic nuance is added.

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 'list' and resource 'audiovisual materials', specifies the sort order 'newest first', and details the geographic and language scope (francophone web video from Burkina Faso, Togo, Benin; deposited Nigerian Hausa/Arabic recordings). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'search_audiovisual' which implies a query-based search.

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 mentions available filters (country, publisher, source_type), giving context on when to apply them. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, but the sibling names indicate that 'search_audiovisual' is for more precise queries, so implicit differentiation is present.

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

All Islam West Africa Collection (IWAC) 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource or analytical dimension: get_* tools are specific to item categories (article, audiovisual, document, image, publication, reference) or specific analyses (cooccurrence, field distribution, lexical metrics, semantic map, sentiment distribution, similar items, temporal distribution, topic distribution). Search tools are clearly separated by subset, with generic 'search' for cross-category discovery and search_* for filtered queries. The only potential overlap between 'fetch' and get_* is resolved by 'fetch' returning a standard format while get_* tools provide category-specific extra metadata.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: fetch, get_*, list_*, search_*. The verbs are clear and the nouns precisely indicate the resource or action. There are no mixed conventions (e.g., no camelCase or inconsistent verb styles), making the naming predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools, the count is well above the 25+ threshold that the rubric flags as too many. While the server's comprehensive scope for a digital archive with multiple subsets and analytical features explains the high count, the sheer number may overwhelm agents and makes the toolset feel heavy rather than well-scoped. Some grouping or consolidation (e.g., merging distribution tools or providing a single fetch with optional detail levels) could reduce the load without losing functionality.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface provides complete coverage for the domain: every content type (articles, publications, references, documents, audiovisual, images, index) has both search and get/retrieve tools, plus listing tools for key vocabularies. Analytical tools for statistics, distributions, sentiment, topics, and similarity are fully realized. There are no obvious dead ends—users can discover, retrieve, and analyze all parts of the collection, and even gaps in the underlying data (e.g., limited OCR coverage) are explicitly surfaced via tools like get_collection_stats.

Resources