Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
diffbot-mcp

diffbot-mcp

Official
by diffbot
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Search Places

search_places
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find cities, countries, regions, and points of interest in the Diffbot Knowledge Graph by name, population, containing place, or proximity to answer place-based questions.

Instructions

Cities, counties, states, provinces, countries, and points of interest in the Diffbot Knowledge Graph by name, population, containing place, or proximity. Prefer for facts on places, rather than recalling from memory. API docs: https://www.diffbot.com/docs/dql/

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_places"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNocountry | region | subregion | city | administrative_area | poi | anyany
nameNoPlace name, exact
nearNoPlace and radius, e.g. 'Paris 50km'
sizeNoMax rows
sortNoOnly if ordering is the question
facetNoBucket by place type
offsetNoRows to skip
regionNoContaining state/region
withinNoContaining place, any level
countryNoContaining country
continentNoContinent (text match, loose)
subregionNoContaining county/district
populationNoRange, e.g. '1M+', '10000-50000'
descriptorsNoFree text, e.g. 'national park' (poi)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds the knowledge-graph provenance and a docs link, but says nothing about result volume, how size/offset pagination behaves, or how the facet/kind bucketing interacts with filters.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource enumeration followed by the usage preference and a reference link. Nothing is redundant, though the trailing docs URL is only marginally informative on its own.

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?

With 14 optional parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema that covers return values, the description supplies what an agent needs to decide to call it. The remaining gap is guidance on how to combine filters (name + within + population) and pagination expectations, which would help for a tool with this many knobs.

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 every one of the 14 parameters is already documented in the schema, and the baseline of 3 applies. The description's phrase 'by name, population, containing place, or proximity' loosely groups the filter families, which adds a little framing but 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb-and-resource pair ('Cities, counties, states, provinces, countries, and points of interest in the Diffbot Knowledge Graph') and enumerates the four search axes: name, population, containing place, and proximity. This is clear enough to separate it from search_organizations or search_people by resource type, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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?

'Prefer for facts on places, rather than recalling from memory' is a real usage directive, but it only addresses the memory-vs-tool decision, not when to choose this tool over its sibling search tools. No exclusions, no prerequisites, and no guidance on when a different search tool would fit better.

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