Peeringdb

Search Facilities

search_facilities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find colocation facilities (data centers) in PeeringDB by name, city, or country (2-letter code). Returns the facility name, location, network count, street address, and website. Provide at least one of query/city/country. Keyless.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "Equinix"
    },
    "name": "search_facilities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	City name.
`limit`	No	Max results (default 20).
`query`	No	Facility name (matches names containing this text).
`country`	No	2-letter ISO country code, e.g. US, DE, GB.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 29, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "Equinix"
+  },
+  {
+    "city": "Amsterdam",
+    "country": "NL"
+  }
+]

First observedJun 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds extra behavioral context by listing the return fields ('facility name, location, network count, street address, and website') and noting 'Keyless' (no API key required), which goes beyond the 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?

The description is two sentences with no unnecessary verbiage. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose and search criteria, and the second sentence covers return values and the input requirement, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a search tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description provides essential context: what it returns, the input requirement, and the keyless nature. It does not cover pagination or sorting, but the limit parameter is in the schema, so the description is reasonably complete for its complexity.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds semantic value by specifying that at least one of query/city/country is required and clarifying that query matches facility names, which reinforces and extends the schema information.

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 specific action and resource: 'Find colocation facilities (data centers) in PeeringDB by name, city, or country.' It distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools like search_networks and search_exchanges by specifying the facility type and data source.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Provide at least one of query/city/country.' It implies the tool is for facility searches, giving clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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

All Peeringdb tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.