Skip to main content
Glama

mcp-knowledge

by io.github.getgapup

content_catalog

Read-only

Browse the Gapup gold-standard content catalogue — video games, films, TV series and music. Returns franchises with their works (title, release year). When to use this tool: an agent needs structured, audited metadata for a cultural franchise, wants to resolve a title to a canonical entity, or browses a domain's catalogue before requesting enrichment. Inputs: a content domain and an optional case-insensitive name filter. Each franchise id can be passed to content_enrichment for its fine-grained tag profile.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoOptional case-insensitive substring filter on franchise name
asyncNoIf true, returns a job_id immediately (<200ms) instead of waiting for the result. Poll the result with job_result(job_id). Use for slow tools to avoid client timeouts.
limitNoMaximum number of franchises to return (default 20)
domainYesContent domain to browse

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYes
domainYes
franchisesYes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns franchises with works but does not detail other behavioral aspects like pagination or performance. Given annotations, the bar is lower and the description provides some context.

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 every sentence adding value. It front-loads the core action, then provides usage guidance, input summary, and chaining information. No extraneous content.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema and annotations, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, inputs, and how to chain it with content_enrichment. No obvious gaps.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions 'optional case-insensitive name filter' which is already in the schema. No additional meaning is added beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool browses a content catalog of video games, films, TV series, and music, returning franchises with their works including title and release year. It distinguishes itself from siblings by indicating it is a preliminary step before enrichment.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly lists when to use the tool: for structured metadata, resolving titles, or browsing before enrichment. It also references content_enrichment for fine-grained tag profiles, providing an alternative.

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

All mcp-knowledge 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

C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially in competitive intelligence, ESG, and risk assessment. For example, there are multiple tools for competitor analysis (competitive_deep_dive, competitor_intel, competitor_moves, etc.) with unclear boundaries. Agents would struggle to select the correct tool without deep understanding of subtle differences.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names are a mix of English and French, and follow no consistent pattern. Some use snake_case (e.g., abm_architect, action_plan_esg), while others are verb-focused (e.g., content_catalog, fx_rate). The lack of a uniform naming convention makes it hard for agents to predict tool names.

Tool Count1/5

With 271 tools, the server is excessively large. Even for a broad knowledge domain, this number of tools makes discovery and selection inefficient. Typical coherent servers have 3-15 tools; this has an order of magnitude more, indicating poor scoping.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers many domains (compliance, finance, marketing, HR, etc.), but the coverage is uneven due to redundancy. Key areas have multiple overlapping tools, while some sub-domains may still have gaps. Overall, the surface is broad but not well-curated.

Resources