Skip to main content
Glama

Data Nashville

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Nashville Recent

nashville_recent
Read-onlyIdempotent

Recent records from a common Nashville open dataset (data.nashville.gov / ArcGIS) by friendly name. PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH for "recent crime in Nashville", "Nashville 311 service requests". Names: crime, 311. Returns the latest rows (newest-first), epoch dates converted to ISO. Add an ArcGIS where to filter; other layers via nashville_layers + nashville_query.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRows to return (1-1000, default 20).
whereNoOptional ArcGIS SQL where, e.g. "OFFENSE='THEFT/OTHER'" or "WARD='2'". Omit for all recent rows.
datasetYesOne of: 311, crime.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral details: 'Returns the latest rows (newest-first), epoch dates converted to ISO.' 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with key information: purpose, when to use, return format and filtering. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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?

For a simple tool with 3 parameters and clear annotations, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, return format (newest-first, epoch date conversion), and relationship to siblings. No gaps given the complexity.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'friendly name' for dataset). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Recent records from a common Nashville open dataset' and specifies the datasets (crime, 311) and behavior (latest rows, newest-first, epoch date conversion). It also distinguishes from siblings by directing users to nashville_layers and nashville_query for other layers.

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?

Explicitly states when to prefer this tool over alternatives: 'PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH for "recent crime in Nashville", "Nashville 311 service requests".' Also explains filtering with 'Add an ArcGIS `where` to filter' and directs to siblings for other layers.

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

All Data Nashville 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

Several tools have unclear boundaries: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical in current behavior, and ask_pipeworx_grounded, validate_claim, and deep_research all overlap with the same underlying routing. The six Polymarket tools (arbitrage, edges, edge_tracker, fill_risk, kalshi_spread, bet_research) share domain and response fields, making misselection likely despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency3/5

Snake_case is used throughout and prefix families (ask_pipeworx_*, nashville_*, polymarket_*, pipeworx_*) are consistent within themselves. However, the overall set mixes verb-first names (ask, compare, remember, subscribe) with noun/adjective-first names (entity_profile, recent_alerts, recent_changes, bet_research), so no single predictable pattern governs all tools.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools, the server exceeds a coherent surface, especially for a server named 'Data Nashville' where only 3 of 34 tools actually serve Nashville data. The count is inflated by several largely unrelated feature families (AI visibility, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions), making the set feel like an aggregation of multiple products rather than one focused server.

Completeness3/5

Individual families are fairly complete: memory has remember/recall/forget, subscriptions have subscribe/unsubscribe/list/recent_alerts, and Nashville has discovery/query/recent access. But the overall domain is unclear, and the Nashville-specific surface is thin (no search across datasets, no non-ArcGIS sources), leaving notable gaps relative to the server name.

Resources