Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

eatingdisorder

by io.github.pooriaarab
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Listings

search_listings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search published eating disorder programs by text, place and category.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_listings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch text, with at least one letter or digit. Matches name, categories, attributes, description and place. Typos fall back to close matches.
cityNoCity slug, from /places.
sortNo`relevance` needs `q` and is the default with it. `name` is the default without `q`. `recent` is newest first.
limitNoItems per page.
cursorNo`page.nextCursor` from the previous response. Opaque. Send the same filters and `limit`.
regionNoRegion slug, from /places.
countryNoISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, any case. A country the directory does not cover, as listed in /places, gives 400.
categoryNoCategory slug, from /categories. A parent slug also matches its children.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety behavior is covered. The single added trait is the word 'published', which signals that unpublished records are excluded from results — useful, but no mention of pagination behavior, error modes, or result shaping beyond that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

One sentence, front-loaded, no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though for an eight-parameter search tool the terseness borders on under-specification rather than disciplined brevity.

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 full schema coverage, rich annotations and no output schema, the description does not need to restate filter semantics. The pieces an agent might still want — that all filters are optional and combinable, and that results are paginated via cursor — are only inferable from the schema, which keeps this just short of complete.

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% and already explains q, sort defaults, cursor reuse, and slug sources, so the description need not carry parameter detail. The description's 'text, place and category' maps loosely onto q, city/region/country and category, adding no syntax or constraint beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (search) and a specific resource (published eating disorder programs) plus the filter axes (text, place, category), which distinguishes it from get_listing and the list_* siblings in spirit. It stops short of naming any alternative outright, so differentiation is implied rather than asserted.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative. The phrase 'by text, place and category' hints at the intended filter combinations, but nothing tells an agent whether to reach for search_listings versus list_places/list_categories for browsing, or that zero-argument calls are legal.

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

All eatingdisorder toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources