Skip to main content
Glama

Jinero

by online.jinero

Search Fonts Tool

search_fonts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the free font catalog by name, category, style tags, language coverage, variable/monospace flags and style count. Returns a paginated list of families.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoFuzzy name match.
pageNoPage number.
sortNoSort direction.
langsNoComma-separated language codes, e.g. 'latin,cyrillic' — ALL must be supported.
orderNoSort field, default 'likes'.
styleNoComma-separated style tags, e.g. 'handwriting,condensed' — ALL must match. One of: handwriting, script, display, slab, rounded, condensed, expanded, stencil, pixel, blackletter, outline, retro.
categoryNoComma-separated categories, e.g. 'serif,sans'.
per_pageNoResults per page (default 24).
variableNoOnly variable fonts.
monospaceNoOnly monospace fonts.
styles_maxNoMaximum number of styles.
styles_minNoMinimum number of styles.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / style
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated style tags, e.g. 'handwriting,condensed' — ALL must match. One of: handwriting, script, display, slab, rounded, condensed, expanded, stencil, pixel, blackletter, outline, retro.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety. The description adds context about the catalog being free and the return being paginated, which is useful. However, it does not explain how filters combine across different parameters (e.g., AND vs OR) or any edge cases like pagination defaults, though some of that is in the schema descriptions. No contradictions with 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?

The description is two short sentences. The first sentence states the action and the search dimensions, and the second states the return type. There is no wasted wording, and the most important information (what it searches) is front-loaded.

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 complex search tool with 12 optional parameters, the description is reasonably complete given the rich schema and annotations. It states the return type (paginated families) and the catalog scope (free). It does not explicitly mention that all filters are optional and combinable, nor does it detail cross-parameter AND semantics, but these are common for search tools and partially covered by schema descriptions for langs and style.

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 each parameter has a clear description. The tool description groups parameters into logical categories (name, category, style tags, etc.) but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the full semantic weight.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' and names the resource 'free font catalog', then enumerates the key filter dimensions (name, category, style tags, language coverage, variable/monospace flags, style count). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like search_palettes or get_font by focusing on catalog search. The return type (paginated list of families) is also stated, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for searching fonts by various criteria, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_palettes or get_font. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided. While the context is clear, the lack of differentiation from sibling search tools leaves the agent to infer the appropriate selection.

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

All Jinero toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources