Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ChartAnt

by net.chartant
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Clean up place names

match_places
Read-onlyIdempotent

Turn messy place names into standard names and codes: countries (ISO 3166 codes), the states/provinces/regions of one country (ISO 3166-2 codes) or US counties (FIPS codes). Understands other languages, abbreviations and typos ("Bayern", "BY", "Bavarai" → Bavaria, DE-BY). Use it to clean a column of locations before a map, a join or a report. Draws nothing; returns one line per name: the standard name and code, the options when ambiguous, or 'not found' with a suggestion.

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": "match_places"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
levelNocountry (default without 'country'), region (needs 'country') or county (US).
namesYesThe place names to clean, as written in the data.
stateNoFor US counties: limit to one state, e.g. 'TX'.
countryNoFor regions: the country, e.g. 'DE' or 'Germany'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 is covered. The description adds value beyond that: it clarifies 'Draws nothing' (no chart/map rendering) and, with no output schema present, describes the return shape — standard name and code, ambiguous options, or 'not found' with a suggestion.

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?

Three tight sentences: capability first, then the use case, then the return behavior — well front-loaded with no filler. The opening sentence is dense with code-system detail but every clause carries information the agent needs.

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?

For a four-parameter, low-complexity lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, when to use it, and what comes back, including ambiguity and not-found handling. Remaining details (batch limits, exact county output formatting) are adequately handled by the schema.

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 the baseline is 3; the description earns more by giving worked examples of messy input ('Bayern', 'BY', 'Bavarai' → Bavaria, DE-BY) that illustrate tolerance for languages, abbreviations and typos. It reinforces the level/country dependency already in the schema but does not add syntax detail for the state parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Turn messy place names into standard names and codes') and enumerates the three supported levels with their code systems (ISO 3166, ISO 3166-2, US FIPS). This is clearly distinguishable from the sibling chart/dashboard generators without opening any schema.

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?

It states a concrete usage context: 'clean a column of locations before a map, a join or a report,' which tells the agent when this tool is the right precursor step. It does not name an alternative tool or an explicit when-not-to-use case, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All ChartAnt 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