The Cracks Index

Region detail

region_detail

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return one sub-national area: score, rank, indicator breakdown and fix.

Given a region code (an EU NUTS-2 code or a Dutch municipality CBS
GM-code), returns that area's composite score, its rank within its own
level (regions rank against regions, municipalities against
municipalities), the per-indicator breakdown and the single highest-impact
improvement for the area.

Read-only, no personal data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`region_code`	Yes	Area code of an EU NUTS-2 region or Dutch municipality, e.g. 'NL32' (Noord-Holland) or 'GM0363' (Amsterdam). Case-insensitive.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the rank is "within its own level" (regions vs municipalities) and the 'fix' is the "single highest-impact improvement." It also notes "Read-only, no personal data," which reinforces the annotation without contradiction.

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?

Two dense sentences plus a brief safety note. Each sentence carries meaningful information: the first captures the core output, the second defines the input and rank scoping, and the third is a concise qualifier. No wasted words.

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?

With a single required parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema present, the description fully covers the essential behavior. It explains the rank nuance and the nature of the 'fix', making the tool's purpose and output clear without needing to detail return fields or error cases.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema's parameter description already explains the region_code format and gives examples. The tool description repeats the format but does not add new parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Return one sub-national area: score, rank, indicator breakdown and fix." It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like country_detail (national level) and compare_* tools (comparison), and matches the tool name 'region_detail' with a precise definition of what is returned.

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 states the input format (EU NUTS-2 or Dutch CBS GM-code) and explains the rank semantics, giving clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All The Cracks Index tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct query: rankings, country details, region details, comparisons, trends, correlations, methodology, and improvement guidance. Despite minor overlaps (e.g., country_fix and improvement_guidance), descriptions clearly differentiate them, so an agent can reliably select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix patterns: some start with verbs (compare_countries, get_cracks_index), others with nouns (area_statistics, country_detail, methodology). While readable and clear, the lack of a consistent verb_noun or noun_verb paradigm reduces predictability for an agent.

Tool Count5/5

With 13 tools covering the full spectrum of index queries—rankings, details, comparisons, trends, correlations, methodology, and improvement guidance—the count is well-scoped for the domain. No tool feels superfluous, and the set is neither too sparse nor too bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface provides complete CRUD-like coverage for the Cracks Index: full ranking, per-area detail and breakdown, comparisons, trends, top movers, indicator correlations, ranking by indicator, methodology, and improvement guidance. No obvious gaps exist for common agent workflows.

Resources

Need Help?