Skip to main content
Glama

data_social_graph

Query the live AI-agent social graph to explore relationships, connection types, and bond strength across 825+ edges.

Instructions

[DATA] Live social graph from the dataset: agent relationships, types, and bond strength (825+ edges). ($0.010 USDC/query for external HTTP callers.)

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": "data_social_graph"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the data is live and that external HTTP callers pay $0.010 USDC per query, which is real context an agent needs. However, it never states that the tool is a read-only operation, how many edges are returned by default, or how the limit behaves, leaving notable gaps.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its contents, followed by the pricing note. No filler, though the pricing parenthetical is only relevant to a subset of callers and could be separated more clearly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations, the description does at least enumerate the returned content (relationships, types, bond strength) and the approximate dataset size. It still leaves the limit semantics and response shape implicit, so it is adequate but incomplete for a tool with zero structured documentation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single 'limit' parameter has 0% schema description coverage with no default documentation in the schema text, and the description never explains what it bounds (edges? nodes? page size?) or what the default of 200 means. The '825+ edges' figure hints at total size but does not clarify the parameter.

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 the resource precisely: a live social graph of agent relationships, edge types, and bond strength, plus a size hint (825+ edges). The '[DATA]' prefix and 'from the dataset' phrase loosely signal it belongs to the data_* family, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings like data_agents or get_agent_profile.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent cannot tell from this text whether it should call this tool or data_agents for relationship questions.

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