Skip to main content
Glama

Search Datasets

search_datasets
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the dati.gov.it catalogue of Italian public-administration open data (CKAN package_search). Returns matching datasets with titles/descriptions (mostly Italian). Query may be Italian or English; Italian matches far more.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fqNoSolr filter query, e.g. "organization:aci", "tags:turismo", or "res_format:CSV".
rowsNoMax results, 1-1000 (default 25).
sortNoSort spec, e.g. "metadata_modified desc".
queryYesSearch terms, Italian or English. e.g. "trasporti", "salute", "bilancio", "health".
startNo0-based offset for paging.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  {
      +    "query": "trasporti"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "fq": "res_format:CSV",
      +    "query": "salute",
      +    "rows": 50
      +  }
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. Description adds that results are mostly Italian and mentions the underlying API, which is helpful but not transformative. No contradiction with annotations.

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 efficient sentences with no waste. The first sentence states the action and resource; the second adds key language insight. Front-loaded and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (5 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential functionality and query language behavior. It does not describe return fields explicitly, but the tool is standard enough that this is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds minor value by noting that Italian queries yield more results, complementing the query parameter's description.

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 the tool searches the dati.gov.it catalogue of Italian public-administration open data, using CKAN package_search. It distinguishes from sibling tools by targeting a specific authoritative source and language context.

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?

Provides context on query language effectiveness (Italian matches far more) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings or give exclusions. Implicit usage guidance is present but not explicit.

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.