Skip to main content
Glama

Bookbrainz

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Lookup

lookup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a single BookBrainz entity (work, edition, author, publisher, series, or edition-group) by its UUID (bbid), with optional sub-resources (aliases, relationships, identifiers) via the includes parameter.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bbidYesBookBrainz UUID
typeYeswork | edition | author | publisher | series | edition-group
includesNoComma-sep optional sub-resources (aliases, relationships, identifiers, ...)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bbidNoBookBrainz unique identifier
nameNoPrimary name of the entity
typeNoEntity type (work, edition, author, etc.)
aliasesNoAlternative names for the entity
identifiersNoExternal identifiers (ISBN, etc.)
relationshipsNoRelated entities and relationships

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description aligns and adds behavioral detail (entity types, optional includes). No contradictions.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. Front-loaded with the core action and entity types.

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 presence of output schema, rich annotations, and full parameter coverage, the description is complete enough for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 includes parameter descriptions. The description adds context about optional sub-resources and the includes format, but does not significantly extend beyond schema info.

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 specifies the action ('Fetch'), the resource ('BookBrainz entity'), the identifier ('UUID'), and the allowed entity types, explicitly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search' or 'compare_entities'.

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?

Description clearly states the tool is for fetching a single entity by UUID, implying usage. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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

All Bookbrainz 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set mixes three distinct domains: BookBrainz entity access (browse, lookup, search), Pipeworx data routing (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, suggest_questions), and Polymarket betting analysis. Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the ask_pipeworx variants and the various polymarket_* tools, which an agent could easily confuse.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a readable snake_case convention. While some are single verbs (browse, lookup, search), others use compound patterns (ask_pipeworx_grounded, polymarket_edge_tracker, pipeworx_trending), and there are a few noun-first names (entity_profile, pipeworx_feedback, recent_changes). The inconsistency is minor and does not hinder readability.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, this is a large surface for a server named Bookbrainz, yet only 3 tools (browse, lookup, search) actually serve that domain. The remaining 31 tools are unrelated Pipeworx/Polymarket functionality, making the tool count inappropriate for the stated server purpose and suggesting a mislabeled or overloaded server.

Completeness2/5

The BookBrainz domain is severely incomplete: it offers read-only access (search, browse, lookup) but no create, update, or delete operations for entities. For the broader Pipeworx/Polymarket functionality, coverage is quite deep, but that is not the server's stated domain. This leaves a fundamental gap for the BookBrainz use case.

Resources