Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

tes_school_search

Search Tes Schools Directory by school name or location to return listing facts and employer IDs. Use each ID to view full school profiles and open roles.

Instructions

Search the Tes Schools Directory. Searches Tes's (tes.com) public Schools Directory by school name or location. Returns listing facts (name, logo, a short description, address) for each matching school/employer. Each result's id is the same employer id tes-job-employer accepts, so a caller can go straight from a name/location search to a full employer profile (school type/phase/funding status/gender/age range, and its currently-open positions) without first needing a job posting to discover the id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoOne-based page
queryYesSchool name or location
page_sizeNoResults per page

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.16.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and mostly delivers: it enumerates returned fields (name, logo, short description, address) and explains the id linkage to tes-job-employer. It omits rate limits, auth requirements, and pagination behavior, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 sentences, purpose front-loaded, then return contents, then the id handoff. Every sentence carries information, though the third sentence is dense and could be tightened.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist, so the description must explain returns and behavior; it covers return fields and the downstream id use case well. Missing pagination and permission details are minor for a public-directory search.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters (query, page, page_size) are already documented in the schema. The description restates that query is school name or location but adds no format/syntax detail for paging or query, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Tes Schools Directory', tes.com) and explicitly differentiates from the sibling tes-job-employer by explaining the shared employer id. An agent can identify the tool without opening the 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?

States the searchable dimensions (school name or location) and describes the intended workflow of moving from a name/location search to a full employer profile via tes-job-employer. It doesn't name a when-not-to-use case, but the context is clear enough to route correctly.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools