Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Rubygems

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Gems

search_gems
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search RubyGems by keyword in name/description. Returns matching gems sorted by relevance with name, version, downloads, and info text.

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": "authentication"
    },
    "name": "search_gems"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (1-based, default 1).
limitNoMax results to return (1–30, default 10). API caps at 30/page.
queryYesKeyword(s) to search for (e.g., "authentication", "json parser")

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gemsYesList of matching gems
pageYesPage number of results
countYesNumber of gems returned
queryYesSearch query that was used

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying that results are sorted by relevance and include specific fields, providing useful 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded, with no redundant information.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers purpose and result structure, but could mention pagination limits briefly. Overall, adequate for a search tool with full schema coverage.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'keyword in name/description' which aligns with the query parameter.

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 action (search), resource (RubyGems), and what is returned (name, version, downloads, info text). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the specific domain of RubyGems.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'search_within' and 'deep_research', explicit usage context is missing.

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

All Rubygems toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources