Skip to main content
Glama

MacrosMap: Restaurant Menu Macros

Search restaurants

search_restaurants
Read-only

Free. Find restaurants in MacrosMap by name and/or near a location. Returns names, addresses and how many menu items have macro data. Use before the paid tools to check coverage.

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_restaurants"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude, to find restaurants nearby
lngNoLongitude, to find restaurants nearby
limitNo
queryNoRestaurant or chain name, e.g. "chipotle"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds that the tool is free, what fields it returns, and its coverage-check role before paid tools. It still omits richer behavior such as pagination or handoff details, but adds meaningful context beyond the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with cost and purpose, then return fields and a usage cue. No redundant restatement of the name/title or schema details.

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 no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields: names, addresses, and count of menu items with macro data. It covers purpose, cost, and basic usage, though it does not clarify result-limit behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 75%, and the description explains 'by name and/or near a location' but says nothing about the limit parameter. The lat/lng/query params are already documented in the schema, so the description adds only marginal semantic value.

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?

States the specific verb 'Find' and resource 'restaurants' plus scope 'in MacrosMap by name and/or near a location.' It differentiates discovery from sibling menu/item tools by positioning it as a free coverage check that returns names, addresses, and macro-data counts rather than menu details.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use before the paid tools to check coverage,' giving a clear when-to-use cue and cost-based alternative context. It does not name the sibling paid tools or state when not to use this search, so it falls short of a full 5.

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.

Resources