Skip to main content
Glama

Giantbomb

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Game

game
Read-onlyIdempotent

Single game by guid or id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guid_or_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoGame ID
urlNoGiant Bomb URL
deckNoShort description
guidNoGlobally unique identifier
nameNoGame name
errorNoError message if not found
imageNoGame image data
genresNoGame genres
versionNoAPI version
platformsNoPlatforms available
developersNoDevelopment companies
publishersNoPublishing companies
descriptionNoFull description
status_codeNoHTTP status code
original_release_dateNoRelease date

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "guid_or_id": "20674"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Single game details",
+  "properties": {
+    "deck": {
+      "description": "Short description",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "description": "Full description",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "developers": {
+      "description": "Development companies",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Error message if not found",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "genres": {
+      "description": "Game genres",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "guid": {
+      "description": "Globally unique identifier",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Game ID",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "image": {
+      "description": "Game image data",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Game name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "original_release_date": {
+      "description": "Release date",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "platforms": {
+      "description": "Platforms available",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "publishers": {
+      "description": "Publishing companies",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status_code": {
+      "description": "HTTP status code",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "Giant Bomb URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "version": {
+      "description": "API version",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint; description adds no new behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise single sentence, front-loaded, no wasted words, though slightly underspecified.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Minimal description for a simple tool; output schema exists but not described; lacks usage context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds 'guid or id' but doesn't clarify format or distinguish between guid and id; example helps slightly.

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 'Single game by guid or id' clearly states the verb (retrieve) and resource (game) and distinguishes from sibling 'games' tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or alternatives guidance; just states what it does without context for when to prefer this over other tools like 'games'.

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

All Giantbomb 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

C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool families have blurry boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all route into the same underlying catalog with only subtle differences, and the six polymarket_* tools overlap heavily (edge scanning vs. fill-risk vs. arbitrage vs. cross-venue spread). Compounding this, the server is named 'Giantbomb' but only 7 of 38 tools relate to that domain, so an agent cannot predict what this server does from its name.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tool names are snake_case, which helps, but the verb pattern is inconsistent: verb_noun (list_subscriptions, resolve_entity, validate_claim), bare verbs (remember, recall, forget), noun-prefix subjects (entity_profile, pipeworx_feedback, polymarket_edges, recent_changes), and even a versioned name (ask_pipeworx_beta) that breaks its own family's pattern. There is no predictable naming scheme an agent could use to guess a tool's name.

Tool Count2/5

38 tools is well past the 25+ 'too many' threshold, and the count is split across two unrelated concerns: ~7 Giant Bomb tools (several explicitly marked 'API offline as of 2026-05') and ~31 tools for a Pipeworx data-research and Polymarket-trading platform. The number is not merely heavy; it serves no single coherent purpose.

Completeness2/5

For the declared Giant Bomb domain, the surface is incomplete (missing videos, franchises, reviews, people, and other known resource types) and largely dead since the underlying API is offline. The Pipeworx half is comparatively complete with routing, grounded answers, research, memory, subscriptions, and feedback, but that coverage is attached to the wrong server identity and does not fill the gaps in the claimed purpose.

Resources