Skip to main content
Glama

Paleobiodb

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Find Fossils

find_fossils
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find fossil occurrences for a taxon from the Paleobiology Database (the global fossil record). Returns occurrences with collection locations (lat/lng, country) and geologic ages. base_name matching includes the taxon and all of its subtaxa. Ages are in millions of years (Ma). Keyless.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax occurrences to return (default 20, max 100).
taxonYesTaxon name, e.g. "Tyrannosaurus" or "Mammalia". Matches the taxon and all subtaxa.
countryNoTwo-letter country code to filter by, e.g. "US".
intervalNoGeologic time interval (period/epoch) to filter by, e.g. "Cretaceous".

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "taxon": "Tyrannosaurus"
+  },
+  {
+    "country": "US",
+    "interval": "Cretaceous",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "taxon": "Mammalia"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: subtaxon matching, age units in Ma, and keyless access. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return values, then matching behavior. Every sentence adds information with no wasted words.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains return values (occurrences with lat/lng, country, ages) and clarifies units and keyless access. Combined with rich annotations and complete schema coverage, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool.

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%, with each parameter well-documented. The description repeats the subtaxon matching behavior already present in the taxon parameter description, adding no new semantic value. 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 finds fossil occurrences for a taxon from the Paleobiology Database, specifying the resource and the action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_taxon or list_subtaxa by focusing on occurrence data with locations and ages.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (when needing fossil occurrences with locations and ages) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. The context is clear, but exclusions or alternative tool references are absent.

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

All Paleobiodb 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 mixes general-purpose Pipeworx tools (ask_pipeworx, ai_visibility_check, bet_research) with only three paleontology-specific tools (find_fossils, get_taxon, list_subtaxa). Multiple similar 'ask_pipeworx' variants further blur distinctions, making it difficult for an agent to select the right tool without deep domain knowledge.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are mostly in snake_case and somewhat descriptive, but the naming conventions vary widely: imperative verbs (find_fossils), interrogative (suggest_questions), and nouns (recent_alerts). The presence of multiple 'ask_pipeworx' variants with inconsistent suffixes (beta, grounded) adds confusion.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, the server is oversized for its claimed paleontology focus. The vast majority of tools are unrelated to Paleobiology, making the server feel more like a general-purpose data API than a specialized paleontology tool. A focused server should have a smaller, targeted set.

Completeness2/5

For the Paleobiology Database purpose, the coverage is severely lacking: only three tools are directly relevant (find_fossils, get_taxon, list_subtaxa). Missing essential operations like searching taxa by name, retrieving occurrences by location, or accessing collections data. The tool set is not a coherent interface for the domain.

Resources