Skip to main content
Glama

gdelt_geo_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Map geographic distribution of news events for a topic to identify location clusters with article counts and tone scores.

Instructions

Get geographic distribution of news events for a topic from the GDELT GEO API. Returns event clusters with location, article count, and tone score.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "gdelt_geo_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesTopic or keyword to map
timespanNoTime window (e.g. '24h', '7d')
maxpointsNoMax location clusters to return (default 50, max 250)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds the genuinely useful piece annotations cannot carry: the shape of the result (clusters with location, article count, tone score), which matters because there is no output schema. It stops short of noting result caps, data latency, or the 50/250 cluster limits.

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the purpose leads and the return shape follows. Nothing is repeated and nothing is missing for its length.

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?

For a three-parameter, annotation-covered read tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does and what comes back. Minor gaps remain around result limits and freshness of the GEO data, but an agent can call this correctly from the description plus schema.

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 parameter (query, timespan, maxpoints) is already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, default, or format detail beyond that, so it sits at the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (geographic distribution of news events) plus the backing API (GDELT GEO), which distinguishes it from sibling gdelt_news_search and gdelt_tone_analysis. It never names those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is implicit rather than enforced.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'for a topic' suggests mapping a keyword's coverage. There is no statement of when to prefer this over gdelt_news_search or gdelt_tone_analysis, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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