Skip to main content
Glama

Edamam

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Nutrition Analysis

nutrition_analysis
Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze the nutrition of a food ingredient or recipe line and return calories, weight, diet/health labels, and a macro breakdown. Example: nutrition_analysis({ ingredient: "1 cup rice and 10 oz chickpeas" })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_apiKeyNoOptional Edamam credentials (comma-separated nutrition,recipe,food pairs of app_id:app_key). Omit to use the platform key.
ingredientYesFree-text ingredient or recipe line, e.g. "1 large apple", "100g cheddar cheese", "1 cup cooked rice"

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds context by specifying output fields and providing an example input format, which is beyond annotation coverage.

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?

Description is a single sentence plus an example. No wasted words, front-loaded with core function.

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 2 params and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it states inputs, outputs, and provides an example. No gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and describes both parameters concisely. The description adds a concrete example and clarifies the ingredient format, which aids understanding 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 it analyzes nutrition of a food ingredient or recipe line and lists specific outputs (calories, weight, labels, macros). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_food and search_recipes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. An example is given, but no 'when not to use' or mention of sibling tools. Usage is implied by purpose.

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

All Edamam 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set includes multiple overlapping tools (ask_pipeworx variants, many polymarket tools) that serve similar purposes, and there is a sharp domain split between food tools and Pipeworx data tools, making it hard for an agent to choose correctly.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names are inconsistent, mixing verb_noun (search_food), noun_verb (nutrition_analysis), prefixed (pipeworx_feedback, polymarket_arbitrage), and no pattern. Some use underscores, some use whole words.

Tool Count3/5

34 tools is on the high side, and the scope is extremely broad (food, data queries, prediction markets, subscriptions), which could overwhelm an agent, but the number alone is not extreme.

Completeness2/5

As a food API server, it is missing key features like recipe details, ingredient substitution, or meal planning, while including many extraneous tools. The data analytics tools are extensive but not aligned with the server's stated purpose.

Resources