Find Indian-American CPAs, tax preparers & financial advisors.
Provide a point (`lat`+`lng`, optional `radius_miles`) or `city`/`state`. Filter by `tag`
(e.g. "cpa", "tax", "financial_advisor").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | ||
| lng | No | ||
| tag | No | ||
| city | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| state | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| open_now | No | ||
| radius_miles | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{
+ "default": 0,
+ "title": "Offset",
+ "type": "integer"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It fails to mention that the tool returns a list, is paginated (limit/offset), or if it's read-only. This lack of transparency hurts.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is very concise, with a clear purpose statement followed by brief usage instructions in two lines. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With 9 parameters and no annotations, the description should cover all behavioral aspects. It does not explain pagination, the open_now filter, or result format (though output schema exists). Significant gaps remain.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%. The description explains lat, lng, radius_miles, city, state, and tag, but omits limit, offset, and open_now. These are crucial for controlling results and filtering, leaving significant gaps.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool finds Indian-American CPAs, tax preparers, and financial advisors. It distinguishes from siblings like search_finance_by_text (text search) and get_finance_details (details).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explains how to use parameters: provide lat/lng with optional radius_miles, or city/state, and filter by tag. It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over siblings, but the guidance is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.