Skip to main content
Glama

Cloudflare Radar

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Top Locations

top_locations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Top locations by a metric. metric=http_requests returns countries by share of HTTP traffic; metric=dns_queries by DNS; metric=attacks by attack origin. Returns ranked list with share percentages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo1-100 (default 10)
metricNohttp_requests | dns_queries | attacks (default http_requests)
date_rangeNoLookback window (default 28d)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metricYesMetric type (http_requests, dns_queries, attacks)
locationsYesRanked list of top locations
date_rangeYesLookback window applied

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "metric": "http_requests"
+  },
+  {
+    "date_range": "7d",
+    "limit": 25,
+    "metric": "attacks"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "date_range": {
+      "description": "Lookback window applied",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "locations": {
+      "description": "Ranked list of top locations",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "code": {
+            "description": "2-letter country code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Country name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "share_pct": {
+            "description": "Percentage share of metric",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "metric": {
+      "description": "Metric type (http_requests, dns_queries, attacks)",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "metric",
+    "date_range",
+    "locations"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds that the output is a ranked list with share percentages, providing behavioral context beyond what annotations offer.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second provides metric-specific details. Well-structured for quick understanding.

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 output schema exists and the description already mentions key output features (ranked list, percentages), the description is complete. No gaps remain for an agent to invoke 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the description is not required to add much. It briefly mentions the three metric options but does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema.

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 returns top locations by a specified metric (http_requests, dns_queries, attacks) with share percentages. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'attack_summary' by specifying multiple metrics and a ranked output.

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?

The description explains what the tool does but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or situations where another sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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

All Cloudflare Radar toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources