Skip to main content
Glama
fahadimmad786-stack

goodreads-mcp

Top Books By Rating

top_books_by_rating

Find top-rated or lowest-rated books by setting a minimum-ratings threshold, with options for publication year, language, and edition grouping.

Instructions

Highest- or lowest-rated books, subject to a minimum-ratings threshold.

The threshold is the whole point: raise it for a result about well-known books, lower it to reach the long tail. Ties break toward the more heavily rated book.

Under the default unit="editions" a work with several editions can take several places in the list -- all with the same rating, since editions of one work largely share a rating pool. Pass unit="works" for a list of distinct works.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
unitNo'editions' ranks the table as stored, so several editions of one work can occupy several places in the list. 'works' collapses editions sharing a normalised title and ranks the best-rated edition of each, giving a list of distinct works.editions
limitNoBooks to return, max 100.
year_toNoLatest publish_year, inclusive.
languageNolanguage_normalised ISO code, e.g. 'en'.
directionNo'desc' for highest rated first, 'asc' for lowest rated first.desc
year_fromNoEarliest publish_year, inclusive.
min_ratingsNoMinimum ratings a book must have to be ranked. Floor 1. At low values the top of the list is obscure books with a handful of 5-star ratings.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Install Server

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals non-obvious behavior: editions of the same work can occupy multiple positions under the default, ties resolve toward more heavily rated books, and unit='works' collapses editions. This goes beyond what the name or schema alone would imply.

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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence contributes: core behavior, threshold rationale, tie-breaking, and the editions-vs-works nuance. There is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

All 7 parameters are fully documented in the schema, the output schema is provided, and the description covers the behavioral nuances an agent cannot infer from schema alone. For a read-style ranking tool with no destructive or auth concerns, the available context is sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'whole point' of the minimum-ratings threshold, how ties are broken, and the real-world effect of the unit default. This enriches the schema's parameter descriptions without redundant restatement.

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?

The description states exactly what the tool returns: highest- or lowest-rated books, filtered by a minimum-ratings threshold. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like top_titles_by_user_ratings and rating_distribution, which have different units of analysis.

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?

The description gives practical guidance: raise the threshold for well-known books, lower it for the long tail, and pass unit='works' for distinct works instead of editions. It does not explicitly name alternatives among the sibling tools, but the usage context is clear enough to select this tool correctly.

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

Other Tools

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/fahadimmad786-stack/goodreads-mcp'

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