Skip to main content
Glama
datavilleorg

dataville-mcp

by datavilleorg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Search a Dataville data source

search_dataville
Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up one item in a Dataville source by keywords and return a single matching record with full text and structured metadata.

Instructions

Look up one thing in a Dataville data source by keywords and get back the single best-matching record (full text in body, structured fields in metadata). Use describe_dataville_source to see what keywords a source expects. To get many records, filter, or page through results, use query_dataville instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNoExtra query-string parameters passed through to the API as-is. Most callers need none.
sourceYesData source name, e.g. 'wikipedia', 'arxiv', 'edgar' (see list_dataville_sources)
summaryNoIf true, truncate `body` to its first 100 characters to save tokens
keywordsYesSearch keywords or identifier, e.g. a title, ticker, or package name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.8
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / keywords / description
      Previous value: -"Search keywords or identifier for the query"New value: +"Search keywords or identifier, e.g. a title, ticker, or package name"
    • changedInput schema / properties / params / description
      Previous value: -"Optional additional query parameters"New value: +"Extra query-string parameters passed through to the API as-is. Most callers need none."
    • addedInput schema / properties / params / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / source / description
      Previous value: -"Data source name, e.g. 'wikipedia', 'arxiv', 'edgar'"New value: +"Data source name, e.g. 'wikipedia', 'arxiv', 'edgar' (see list_dataville_sources)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / summary
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "If true, truncate `body` to its first 100 characters to save tokens",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: it discloses the cardinality (one record), the return structure (full text in `body`, fields in `metadata`), and that it is a passthrough-style lookup. It does not cover failure modes (e.g. no match found), keeping 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core verb and cardinality, followed by return shape and then explicit alternatives. No sentence is redundant and no filler is present.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return fields (`body`, `metadata`) and cardinality. Combined with full parameter coverage and clear sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to invoke this correctly.

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%, so all four parameters (source, keywords, params, summary) are already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description reinforces how keywords are chosen by pointing at describe_dataville_source, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 precise verb (look up) and resource (a Dataville data source) plus the exact scope: keywords in, single best-matching record out. It also disambiguates from query_dataville and describe_dataville_source by name, so an agent can pick it 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: use describe_dataville_source to learn what keywords a source expects, and use query_dataville when you need many records, filtering, or paging. The when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are both spelled out.

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