Skip to main content
Glama

Numbers

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Search Within a Source

search_within
Read-onlyIdempotent

Semantic search INSIDE a fetched record. Pass the text you already pulled (e.g. a SEC 10-K body, an article, a long tool result) plus a natural-language query; get back the top-N passages with character offsets and similarity scores. Use when the record is too big to cram into the prompt — search_within saves context, returns only the passages that matter, and every passage carries an offset so the agent can verify a verbatim quote. Pairs with ask_pipeworx_grounded: fetch with the gateway, ground over the relevant passages instead of the whole document. BGE-base-en embeddings + cosine over 500-char overlapping windows; cap is 200K chars (longer inputs are truncated and flagged).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesThe document text to search inside (max ~200K chars).
limitNoMax passages to return (1-20, default 5).
queryYesNatural-language query — what passages do you want? E.g. "supply-chain risk", "fiscal year 2024 revenue", "drug interactions with warfarin".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable details: max input size (200K chars), truncation warning, embedding model (BGE-base-en), chunking strategy (500-char overlapping windows), and output features (character offsets, similarity scores). No contradictions.

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 a compact paragraph that front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently adds usage context, pairing suggestion, and technical details. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully covers return values (top N passages with offsets and scores), constraints (200K char limit, truncation flag), and use cases. All three parameters are explained comprehensively. The tool's moderate complexity is well addressed.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with all three parameters described. The description adds concrete examples for 'query' (e.g., 'supply-chain risk'), specifies default for 'limit' (5), and clarifies the max length for 'text'. This goes beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it performs semantic search inside a fetched record, provides concrete examples (SEC 10-K body, article), and explains the input-output behavior. It indirectly distinguishes from siblings by mentioning pairing with ask_pipeworx_grounded.

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 explicitly says 'use when the record is too big to cram into the prompt' and notes it saves context. It also suggests pairing with ask_pipeworx_grounded. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives beyond the sibling pairing.

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

All Numbers toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have detailed descriptions that clearly delineate their purposes, but ask_pipeworx_beta is currently functionally identical to ask_pipeworx, and deep_research overlaps with ask_pipeworx for multi-part questions. The six polymarket_* tools also share related territory, though their boundaries are well-documented.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case, and domain prefixes like polymarket_, pipeworx_, and ask_ add predictability. However, the set mixes verb-led names (compare_entities, resolve_entity, search_within) with noun-led names (entity_profile, recent_changes, bet_research), so there is no single consistent verb_noun convention.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is well above the 15-25 'heavy' band and feels like a kitchen sink: the server bundles a data-research platform, prediction-market analysis, memory, subscriptions, number conversions, and web-dev utilities into one surface. Many of these are unrelated to the server's 'Numbers' identity.

Completeness4/5

The main subdomains are thoroughly covered: data lookup (ask_pipeworx variants, deep_research, validate_claim), prediction-market analysis (arbitrage, edges, fill risk, kalshi spread), memory (remember/recall/forget), and subscriptions (subscribe/list/unsubscribe/recent_alerts). Minor gaps exist, such as no subscription update operation, but core lifecycle coverage is strong.

Resources