Skip to main content
Glama
easakura

Japan Subsidy Search MCP

by easakura
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_subsidies for finding subsidies and get_subsidy_detail for retrieving details by ID. No overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools use a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (search_subsidies, get_subsidy_detail), which makes the naming predictable and easy to understand.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server is minimal but still functional for its core purpose of search and detail retrieval. It could benefit from additional tools like filtering or listing categories.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the essential search and detail retrieval operations for Japanese subsidies. Minor gaps exist, such as lack of filtering by amount or category, but the core workflow is complete.

  • Average 4.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 4 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation returning details, but lacks disclosure on idempotency, authorization needs, or potential errors. Minimal beyond the core function.

    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?

    Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted text.

    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?

    Given simple input (one param) and no output schema, the description covers essential context: what is retrieved and where ID comes from. Could mention return format but not necessary.

    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% with a well-described id parameter. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

    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?

    Description explicitly states '取得する' (obtain) and lists specific details like purpose, eligibility, subsidy rate, etc. It clearly distinguishes from sibling search_subsidies by referencing that IDs come from its results.

    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?

    Description implies usage context: use after search_subsidies to get details. It mentions the ID source, but doesn't explicitly exclude scenarios or mention when not to use.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    動作の特性をよく開示：リアルタイム性、締切順ソート、都道府県フィルタの挙動、結果に含まれる情報。アノテーションがない中で、読み取り専用であることは暗黙的に理解できる。

    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?

    3文で本質を過不足なく伝える。各文が目的、動作、返却内容をカバーし、無駄がない。

    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?

    出力スキーマがない中で、各結果に含まれる情報（URL、上限額、残り日数）を明示。ソート順やフィルタ挙動も説明し、検索ツールとして完結。

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters4/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    スキーマカバレッジ100%だが、説明は都道府県パラメータの挙動（地域限定＋全国）や締切順ソートの補足を追加しており、スキーマ以上の価値を提供。

    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?

    明確な動詞「リアルタイム検索する」とリソース「補助金・助成金」、データベース「jGrants」を特定。兄弟ツールget_subsidy_detail（詳細取得）と明確に区別される。

    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?

    募集中の案件を締切順に返すと明示。都道府県指定時の挙動（地域＋全国両方）を説明。代替ツールへの言及はないが、兄弟ツール名から検索と詳細の使い分けが推察可能。

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

japan-subsidy-search-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

japan-subsidy-search-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/easakura/japan-subsidy-search-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server