Skip to main content
Glama

Gdacs

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Events

events
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search and list GDACS global disaster events filterable by type (EQ=earthquake, TC=tropical cyclone, FL=flood, VO=volcano, DR=drought, WF=wildfire), alert level (Green/Orange/Red), ISO date range, and ISO3 country code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoISO date.
fromNoISO date.
event_typeNoEQ | TC | FL | VO | DR | WF
alert_levelNoGreen | Orange | Red
country_iso3No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent safety. The description adds the data source (GDACS) and clarifies the filtering dimensions, which supplements the annotations with useful context. 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?

A single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists filters. No wasted words; every clause adds value.

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?

With a rich annotation set and output schema present, the description covers the essential behavior and filters. It could mention that all parameters are optional or how results are ordered, but these are minor given the schema and annotations.

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?

The description expands event_type codes to full disaster names (earthquake, tropical cyclone, etc.), which the schema does not explain. It also specifies 'ISO' for date formatting and ISO3 for country code, adding meaning beyond the schema's terse descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('Search and list') and resource ('GDACS global disaster events') with filtering dimensions. It clearly distinguishes from the singular sibling tool 'event' by emphasizing the list/search nature.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: searching and listing events with optional filters. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for single event details, use event'), but the scope is unambiguous.

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

All Gdacs 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but the three ask_pipeworx variants (especially ask_pipeworx_beta, identical to ask_pipeworx) and the six Polymarket tools overlap conceptually and could cause misselection. Detailed descriptions largely compensate, but the boundaries between some meta-tools (e.g., ask_pipeworx vs deep_research vs bet_research) require careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case, but conventions are mixed: verb-first (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, discover_tools), noun-first compounds (entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), and single-word nouns (event, events, rss). The pattern is predictable for common actions but inconsistent across the set, making it harder to guess names for related tasks.

Tool Count2/5

At 35 tools, the count is heavy and the server named 'Gdacs' includes many unrelated tools (Polymarket, npm scanning, AI visibility), indicating scope creep. Several tools could be consolidated (e.g., the ask_pipeworx family and multiple pattern-market scanners), and the breadth dilutes the disaster-alerting focus implied by the server name.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers core workflows: data querying (ask/research/validate), entity profiling, prediction-market analysis (arbitrage/edges/fill risk), and subscription management (create/list/cancel). Minor gaps exist, such as no direct fetch tool for a specific Pipeworx pack and limited GDACS event management (only read operations), but these are workable with the provided meta-tools.

Resources