compare_countries
Side-by-side comparison of an indicator across multiple countries for a given year (default = most recent available).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | No | ||
| countries | Yes | ||
| indicator | Yes |
World Bank & FRED Macro
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions default year but fails to specify return format, data source, or whether it is read-only. This is insufficient for a tool with no other behavioral hints.
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?
Single sentence front-loads the key purpose and default behavior. No unnecessary words; highly efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It omits return value structure, error handling, and constraints beyond those in the schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions). Description adds that 'year' defaults to most recent and 'countries' is an array, but does not explain valid indicator names, country code format, or year range. This leaves significant ambiguity.
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?
Description clearly states it performs side-by-side comparison of an indicator across multiple countries, with an optional year defaulting to most recent. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that search or retrieve single series (fred_search_series, wb_indicator, etc.).
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?
Description implies use when cross-country comparison is needed but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. It is adequate but lacks differentiation from siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a distinct purpose: two for World Bank (indicator fetch and search), two for FRED (series fetch and search), and one for cross-country comparison. No overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow a source_prefix_action pattern (wb_indicator, wb_search_indicator, fred_series, fred_search_series), but compare_countries breaks the pattern by lacking a source prefix, creating minor inconsistency.
Tool Count5/5
With 5 tools covering two major macroeconomic data sources, the count is appropriate. Each tool serves a necessary function without being excessive or insufficient.
Completeness4/5
The server provides basic search and retrieval for both World Bank and FRED, plus cross-country comparison. Missing features like metadata listing or FRED-specific comparison are minor gaps that don't severely hinder core workflows.