Skip to main content
Glama

Worldbank Projects

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Pipeworx Trending

pipeworx_trending
Read-onlyIdempotent

What other AI agents are calling on Pipeworx right now. Returns the top tools, top packs, and total call volume over a recent window (24h, 7d, or 30d). Useful for: (1) discovering what data sources are hot for current events, (2) confirming a popular tool is the canonical choice before asking your own question, (3) seeing whether your use case aligns with what most agents need. Self-aggregating signal — derived from CF analytics-engine, no PII, just (pack, tool, count). Cached 5min-1h depending on window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
windowNo24h (default) | 7d | 30d. Shorter windows surface what's hot right now; longer windows show steady-state demand.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: caching behavior (5min-1h), data provenance (CF analytics-engine), and privacy guarantees (no PII). This informs the agent about freshness, reliability, and data sensitivity.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, followed by concise use cases and a brief explanation of how the signal works. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully explains the return values (top tools, top packs, total call volume), window options, caching, and data provenance. It is complete for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, with the window parameter fully described (24h/7d/30d and their tradeoffs). The description merely repeats the window options without adding new semantic detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's function with a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('top tools, top packs, and total call volume over a recent window'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on aggregate AI-agent calling patterns, not individual tool discovery.

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 provides three explicit use cases (discovering hot data sources, confirming canonical tool choice, checking alignment with agent needs), giving clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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

All Worldbank Projects 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
Disambiguation3/5

Tools are generally distinguishable by name and description, but there are several similar query/verification tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim) and multiple meta-tools (discover_tools, suggest_questions), causing some ambiguity for agents.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are inconsistent: some tools use verb_noun (search_projects, validate_claim), others are noun_preposition_noun (projects_by_country), single verbs (remember, forget), or compound phrases (generate_llms_txt). No clear pattern.

Tool Count1/5

33 tools is excessive for a server named 'Worldbank Projects', as only 3-4 tools directly relate to Worldbank data. The rest are generic Pipeworx utilities and unrelated domains, making the tool count inappropriate for the server's stated purpose.

Completeness1/5

For the domain of Worldbank Projects, only basic lookup and search tools are provided (search_projects, get_project, projects_by_country). Missing essential CRUD operations, filtering by sector/theme, or project lifecycle management. The server's tool surface is severely incomplete for its intended focus.

Resources