Skip to main content
Glama

Tmdb

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Tv

tv
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch full TMDB TV show details by tv_id. Returns name, overview, first/last air date, number of seasons and episodes, genres, networks, status, and vote average.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tv_idYes
languageNo
append_to_responseNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoTV show ID
nameNoTV show name
genresNoGenres
overviewNoShow overview
vote_averageNoAverage vote rating
last_air_dateNoLast air date
first_air_dateNoFirst air date
number_of_seasonsNoNumber of seasons
number_of_episodesNoNumber of episodes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "tv_id": 1396
+  },
+  {
+    "append_to_response": "credits",
+    "tv_id": 1399
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "first_air_date": {
+      "description": "First air date",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "genres": {
+      "description": "Genres",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "TV show ID",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "last_air_date": {
+      "description": "Last air date",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "TV show name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "number_of_episodes": {
+      "description": "Number of episodes",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "number_of_seasons": {
+      "description": "Number of seasons",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "overview": {
+      "description": "Show overview",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "vote_average": {
+      "description": "Average vote rating",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds specific fields returned, indicating a full data retrieval. No contradictions.

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?

Single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Fetch full TMDB TV show details') and lists key outputs. Every word adds value.

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 3 parameters and an output schema, the description correctly identifies the primary purpose and return data. Lacks detail on optional parameters but overall satisfactory for a read-only tool with minimal complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description explains tv_id implicitly but does not describe 'language' or 'append_to_response' parameters, leaving their semantics unclear. Examples in schema partially compensate but are not part of description.

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?

Clearly states it fetches full TMDB TV show details by tv_id and lists returned fields. Distinguishes from siblings like tv_episode or tv_season which focus on specific parts.

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?

Implies use when you have a specific tv_id and need complete details. No explicit exclusion of alternatives, but context from sibling names (search_tv, discover_tv) provides reasonable guidance.

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

All Tmdb 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set blends two unrelated domains (TMDB and Pipeworx). Among Pipeworx tools, several overlap heavily (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, suggest_questions) with vague boundaries, making it hard for an agent to pick the right one. TMDB tools are distinct but the overall mixture creates confusion about which domain a request belongs to.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools use snake_case, which is consistent. However, naming styles vary widely: TMDB tools use simple noun or verb-first names (movie, search_movie, discover_tv), while Pipeworx tools use longer descriptive phrases with prefixes (ask_pipeworx, polymarket_arbitrage, entity_profile). The pattern is not predictable across the set.

Tool Count2/5

50 tools is excessive for a server named 'Tmdb'. Only about 18 tools are actually TMDB-related; the remaining 32 belong to the Pipeworx ecosystem. This inflates the count and makes the server feel bloated and unfocused, far beyond a well-scoped TMDB server.

Completeness3/5

The TMDB portion is quite complete (search, discover, details, credits, recommendations, trending, genres, configuration). However, the server's overall scope is muddled—it tries to cover two disjoint domains, so no single domain feels fully fleshed out. There are also some missing TMDB features (e.g., upcoming/now playing) that would require extra discovery. The Pipeworx tools cover data broadly but overlap in coverage.

Resources