list_geounitsList UNESCO UIS geographic units (countries/regions) with their ISO3 code (id), name and type. Use the id as geoUnit in get_data. Optional case-insensitive name substring filter.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results to return (default 300). | |
| search | No | Case-insensitive substring matched against country/region name, e.g. "brazil". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "search": "brazil"
+ },
+ {
+ "limit": 50
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description's main behavioral addition is the case-insensitive substring filter. This adds some value but does not contradict annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no wasted words. Efficiently communicates what the tool does and how to use its output.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity, annotations covering safety, and no output schema needed, the description fully explains the return fields and downstream usage. No gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying the filter is case-insensitive and noting the default limit of 300, which goes beyond the schema's property descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool lists UNESCO UIS geographic units with specific fields (ISO3 code, name, type) and how to use the id. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying its domain (UNESCO geounits).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Description provides clear context for use by mentioning the id's role in get_data, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it. Given the sibling list, many tools are unrelated, so the guidance is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.