Skip to main content
Glama

Rawg

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Games

search_games
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the RAWG video game database by name, genre, or platform. Returns games with ratings, Metacritic scores, release dates, platforms, and genres. Example: search_games({ query: "zelda", ordering: "-metacritic" })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoSearch query — a game name or keyword, e.g. "elden ring", "mario"
genresNoFilter by genre slug(s) or id(s), comma-separated, e.g. "action", "role-playing-games-rpg"
_apiKeyNoOptional — your own RAWG API key for higher limits; omit to use the shared Pipeworx key.
orderingNoSort order, e.g. "-rating" (top rated), "-released" (newest), "-metacritic" (best reviewed)
page_sizeNoNumber of games to return (default 20, max 40)
platformsNoFilter by platform id(s), comma-separated, e.g. "4" (PC), "187" (PS5)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "zelda"
+  },
+  {
+    "ordering": "-metacritic",
+    "page_size": 10,
+    "platforms": "7",
+    "query": "elden ring"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds behavioral context by listing return fields (ratings, Metacritic scores, release dates, platforms, genres) and a concrete example with ordering. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful detail beyond 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 two sentences plus an example, front-loading the purpose and providing a concrete usage case. Every sentence adds value; there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and annotations, the description provides a clear overview of functionality and return data. It could mention pagination behavior or rate limit considerations, but the example and schema compensate. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for effective use.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds an example showing how to use query and ordering, and mentions searching by name, genre, or platform, which loosely maps to parameters. While not necessary, the example aids understanding.

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 searches the RAWG video game database by name, genre, or platform, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_game (single game lookup) and list_genres/list_platforms (data enumeration).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for searching games but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_game for specific details, list_genres for genre lists). The example provides practical guidance but lacks direct comparison to siblings.

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

All Rawg toolsInspect
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.

Resources