Skip to main content
Glama

Belgium Data Desk

Search Belgian open datasets

search_datasets
Read-only

Search Belgian open data (about 21,700 records from federal, regional and local publishers: hand-reviewed national registers, data.gov.be and directly harvested portals) in Dutch, French or English. For common needs such as population, the enterprise register (KBO/BCE), air quality, unemployment or train punctuality, the official reference source is listed first, marked authoritative_source, with a guidance block saying who publishes it and the usual pitfalls. Scope 'datasets' (default) means data files and APIs; map layers, PDF publications, research supplements and metadata-only records are separate scopes. Results are catalogue metadata and link-check evidence, not statements about data correctness. Examples: {"query":"bevolking per gemeente"}; {"query":"thuisbatterij"}; {"query":"census 2021","open_licence_only":true}; {"query":"wegenregister","scope":"maps"}; {"query":"luchtkwaliteit","topic":"environment","limit":5}.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_datasets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of results, default 10.
queryYesWords in Dutch, French or English, e.g. 'population by municipality' or 'bevolking gemeente'.
scopeNoKind of record. Default 'datasets'.
topicNoOptional topic id: geology, water, energy, transport, health, population, economy, environment, agriculture, education, government, places, other.
open_licence_onlyNoOnly records whose licence permits reuse (open or share-alike).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety and openness are covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: ranking convention (official reference source listed first, flagged authoritative_source), an embedded guidance block with publisher and pitfalls, scope partitioning, and the caveat that results are metadata not correctness statements. It does not describe pagination or result-set size behavior beyond the limit cap.

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?

Front-loaded with the core verb and corpus, then behaviour, then examples — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The publisher parenthetical and the five-example block are dense but each carries distinct routing information; a slightly tighter example list would still cover the same ground.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so: results are catalogue metadata plus link-check evidence, with an authoritative_source flag and guidance block. Combined with language support, scope partition and the metadata-vs-correctness caveat, an agent has enough to call this correctly and interpret the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, and the description earns above baseline by clarifying the semantic boundary of 'scope' (datasets = data files and APIs; maps, publications, research, metadata are separate) and by showing realistic query phrasing plus topic/limit/open_licence_only combinations in worked examples. Remaining parameters (limit, open_licence_only, topic) are only illustrated, not explained further.

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?

Specific verb and resource: 'Search Belgian open data' with concrete corpus size (~21,700 records), publisher tiers (federal, regional, local), and named sources (data.gov.be, hand-reviewed national registers). It also states what the tool is not, contrasting 'datasets' scope with maps, publications, research and metadata-only records, which lets an agent distinguish it from generic 'search' or 'catalogue_overview' siblings.

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?

Clear context for when this tool applies: multilingual free-text discovery across a defined corpus, with the note that results are catalogue metadata and link-check evidence rather than correctness claims — implying a later fetch step. Guidance for authoritative needs is given (KBO/BCE, air quality, train punctuality surface first with a guidance block), but it never explicitly names the alternative to use for fetching a record or for statistical values.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.