radio

Get Top Stations

get_top_stations

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get trending radio stations ranked by popularity, optionally filtered by country (e.g., 'US', 'GB', 'DE'). Returns station URLs, genres, and vote counts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No	Number of stations to return. Defaults to 10.
`country`	No	Filter by country name (e.g. "Germany", "United States"). Omit for global results.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes	Number of stations returned
`stations`	Yes	List of top-ranked radio stations

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of stations returned",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "stations": {
+      "description": "List of top-ranked radio stations",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "bitrate": {
+            "description": "Bitrate in kbps",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "codec": {
+            "description": "Audio codec used",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "country": {
+            "description": "Country where station broadcasts",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "language": {
+            "description": "Language of broadcast",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Station name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "tags": {
+            "description": "Genres/tags associated with station",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Station stream URL (resolved or fallback)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "votes": {
+            "description": "Popularity vote count",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "name",
+          "url",
+          "country",
+          "language",
+          "tags",
+          "votes",
+          "codec",
+          "bitrate"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "stations"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "count": 10
+  },
+  {
+    "count": 5,
+    "country": "Germany"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds meaningful context about the selection criteria ('trending', 'ranked by popularity') and the exact return fields, which goes beyond simple 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys purpose, optional filter, and return content.

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?

Given the simple tool, rich annotations (read-only, idempotent), existing output schema, and concise description covering core behavior and filter, there are no significant gaps. The description is adequate for correct invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema covers both parameters with descriptions and defaults (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. However, the description's country examples use ISO codes ('US', 'GB', 'DE') while the schema specifies country names ('Germany', 'United States'), introducing ambiguity about the accepted format and potentially misleading the agent.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves trending radio stations ranked by popularity with optional country filter. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'search_stations' by focusing on trending/popular rather than search, and mentions the specific output fields (URLs, genres, vote counts).

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 conveys the use case: get trending/popular stations, optionally filtered by country. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool relative to siblings like search_stations.

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

All radio 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.