Skip to main content
Glama

Vimeo

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Category

category
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch metadata for a single Vimeo category by slug; returns category name, icon, subcategories, and featured video count.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriNoCategory URI
linkNoCategory link
nameNoCategory name
slugNoCategory slug
parentNoParent category if applicable
metadataNoAdditional metadata
picturesNoCategory picture data
descriptionNoCategory description

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: +[
+  {
+    "slug": "animation"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "description": {
+      "description": "Category description",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "link": {
+      "description": "Category link",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "metadata": {
+      "description": "Additional metadata",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Category name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "parent": {
+      "description": "Parent category if applicable",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "pictures": {
+      "description": "Category picture data",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "description": "Category slug",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "uri": {
+      "description": "Category URI",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by detailing the return fields (name, icon, subcategories, featured video count), which is not in annotations. 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 sentence with no wasted words. Information is front-loaded and efficiently communicated.

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?

For a simple fetch tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the main aspects: input (slug), output fields (name, icon, subcategories, featured video count). Complete and sufficient.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It explains the 'slug' parameter is for identifying the category but does not provide additional constraints or format details. Adequate but minimal.

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 'Fetch metadata for a single Vimeo category by slug', specifying the verb, resource, and input method. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'categories' (plural list) and 'category_videos' (videos in a category).

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 implies usage when you need metadata for one category, and the context of sibling tools (e.g., 'categories' for listing all) provides implicit guidance. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool instructions.

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

All Vimeo 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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-duplicates, and the polymarket_* family has six tools with blurred boundaries. The Vimeo tools are distinct, but the massive unrelated Pipeworx set creates ambiguity about which tool is appropriate for a given task.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix conventions: Vimeo tools use bare nouns (video, channel, user), while Pipeworx tools use verb_noun (resolve_entity, validate_claim) or noun_verb (ai_visibility_check). Some names like ask_pipeworx and pipeworx_feedback do not follow a consistent verb-first pattern.

Tool Count2/5

40 tools is far too many for a Vimeo server; only 9 tools are Vimeo-related, and the remaining 31 are an unrelated Pipeworx data toolkit. This inflates the surface area and makes the set unwieldy.

Completeness2/5

The Vimeo surface covers read operations (search, get, list) but lacks any write operations like upload, update, or delete videos. It also misses common Vimeo features like comments, likes, or portfolio management, so common tasks would hit dead ends.

Resources