Zovo Baby Names

Find name popularity trend

find_name_trend

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks how popular a baby name is or was, its rank or number of babies in a year, its trend, peak year, or wants to compare up to 5 names (e.g. "how popular is Olivia", "Emma vs Ava since 1990", "what rank was Jennifer in 1975"). Returns US Social Security birth counts per year 1880-2025, SSA ranks (top 1,000 for past years; listed names in 2025), peak year, highest rank, 10-year change, girls/boys split and other spellings, with a chart. US data only. Does not give name meanings or origins.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "names": "<names>"
    },
    "name": "find_name_trend"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sex`	No	Sex for all names, e.g. girl. Default any: each name uses the sex with more US births in 2016-2025.
`year`	No	Optional single year to report births and rank for, e.g. 1990.
`names`	Yes	1 to 5 first names to look up or compare, e.g. ["Olivia", "Charlotte"]. Add (girl) or (boy) to pick a sex per name, e.g. "Avery (boy)". Accents are ignored for lookup (Zoë finds Zoe).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`note`	Yes
`names`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`decades`	Yes
`not_found`	Yes
`data_years`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive lookup. Beyond that, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: US-only coverage, the 1880–2025 year span, SSA rank coverage, a chart response, and what the tool will not provide.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded: the primary use case comes first, followed by return details and scope limits. It is appropriately sized for a multi-purpose lookup tool, though the first sentence carries a lot of clauses.

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?

An output schema exists, so return format need not be fully explained, yet the description still summarizes the returned metrics and notes the chart. Combined with the US-only scope and explicit exclusions, an agent has enough context to call this 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 description coverage is 100%, so names, sex, and year are already well documented in the schema. The description reinforces the 5-name limit and gives query examples, but it does not add syntax or semantic details beyond what the schema provides.

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 and resource: it answers popularity/rank/trend questions for baby names, with concrete examples. It is clearly not a generic name lookup, but it never names or contrasts the sibling tool find_baby_names, so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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 gives strong when-to-use guidance with representative queries ("how popular is Olivia", "Emma vs Ava since 1990") and clear exclusions ("Does not give name meanings or origins"). It does not explicitly route to find_baby_names when the request is broader than trends.

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

All Zovo Baby Names tools Inspect

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

Need Help?