countriesCountry reference with capital city, currency, etc.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| country_iso2 | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Array of country objects | |
| pagination | No | Pagination metadata |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / capital / descriptionPrevious value: -"Capital city"New value: +"Capital city; null for some territories"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / capital / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / country_iso_numeric / descriptionPrevious value: -"ISO 3166-1 numeric code"New value: +"ISO 3166-1 numeric code (returned as a string)"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / country_iso_numeric / typePrevious value: -"number"New value: +"string"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / currency_code / descriptionPrevious value: -"ISO 4217 currency code"New value: +"ISO 4217 currency code; null for some territories"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / currency_code / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / currency_name / descriptionPrevious value: -"Currency name"New value: +"Currency name; null for some territories"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / currency_name / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / fips_codeAdded value: +{
+ "description": "FIPS country code; null for some territories",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / phone_prefixAdded value: +{
+ "description": "International dialling prefix; null for some territories",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / populationAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Population (returned as a string); null for some territories",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "country_iso2": "US"
+ },
+ {
+ "search": "Japan"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Array of country objects",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "capital": {
+ "description": "Capital city",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "continent": {
+ "description": "Continent name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "country_iso2": {
+ "description": "ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "country_iso3": {
+ "description": "ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "country_iso_numeric": {
+ "description": "ISO 3166-1 numeric code",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "country_name": {
+ "description": "Country name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "currency_code": {
+ "description": "ISO 4217 currency code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "currency_name": {
+ "description": "Currency name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "gmt": {
+ "description": "GMT offset",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "gmt_offset_seconds": {
+ "description": "GMT offset in seconds",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "is_eu": {
+ "description": "Is EU member state",
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "tld": {
+ "description": "Top-level domain",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "pagination": {
+ "description": "Pagination metadata",
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "limit": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "offset": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description need not repeat safety traits. However, it adds no behavioral context such as return shape, list vs single object, or interaction between parameters; it merely states content fields.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core content. It earns its place despite being brief.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only reference with output schema and annotations, the description is minimally adequate but leaves important gaps: it doesn't explain search behavior or the optional limit parameter. More detail would help the agent invoke it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions any of the three parameters (limit, search, country_iso2). It fails to clarify that country_iso2 accepts an ISO code and that search matches country names, leaving the agent without parameter semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description identifies the tool as a country reference with capital city, currency, and other data, making its purpose clear though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'get' or 'search'. It distinguishes the countries resource from sibling tools like cities and airlines.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives; it does not mention search by name/ISO code, pagination, or compare with cities/airlines. The intended usage is only implied by the tool name and schema examples.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and deep_research all routing queries, and the polymarket family (arbitrage, edges, edge_tracker, fill_risk) covering similar ground. While descriptions are detailed, an agent could easily select the wrong tool.
Tool names mix bare nouns (airlines, airports, flights) with verb phrases (compare_entities, resolve_entity) and standalone verbs (remember, forget), with no consistent verb_noun pattern. Names like ask_pipeworx_beta and scan_competitor_ai_presence are internally inconsistent with the rest.
37 tools is far beyond the typical scope for a single server, and many are unrelated to the aviation theme, suggesting a lack of focus. The core aviation functionality only accounts for 6 of the tools.
The aviation tools (airlines, airports, flights, routes, cities, countries) cover basic lookups, but advanced operations like delay statistics or aircraft data are absent. The unrelated tools do not fill these gaps, and the overall surface feels shallow for a server claiming to be an Aviationstack.