Skip to main content
Glama

Unicef

by io.github.pipeworx-io

List Dataflows

list_dataflows
Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse or keyword-search UNICEF's datasets (dataflows). UNICEF Data covers child health, nutrition, education, child protection, child mortality, child poverty, immunization, water/sanitation/hygiene (WASH) and the child-related SDGs. Each result has an id (the dataflowId you pass to dataflow_structure / get_data), a version, and an English name. There are ~70 datasets; pass query to filter. Example: list_dataflows({ query: "mortality" }) or list_dataflows({ query: "nutrition" }).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results to return (default 50).
queryNoCase-insensitive substring filter on dataset id or name, e.g. "mortality", "education", "immunization".

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "mortality"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "query": "nutrition"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that results have id, version, name, and there are ~70 datasets, but doesn't add significant behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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 well-structured sentences with examples, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, description mentions result fields (id, version, name), scope (UNICEF, ~70 datasets), and connects to sibling tools, making it complete for a listing tool.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds usage examples and explains query as case-insensitive substring filter on id or name, also mentions default limit 50, adding value beyond 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 the tool is for browsing or keyword-searching UNICEF datasets (dataflows). It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the 'id' is passed to dataflow_structure/get_data.

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 explicit usage with examples (passing query like 'mortality' or 'nutrition'), mentions ~70 datasets, and implies filtering. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but the examples and context are clear.

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

All Unicef 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool families heavily overlap: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all serve 'find/query Pipeworx data' with blurry boundaries, and the six Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_kalshi_spread) have overlapping purposes. An agent could easily pick the wrong one without reading every description.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow snake_case verb_noun patterns (list_dataflows, get_data, compare_entities, resolve_entity), and families share prefixes (pipeworx_*, polymarket_*, ask_pipeworx_*). However, the server is named 'Unicef' while almost all tool names reference Pipeworx/Polymarket, and verb choices vary widely, so the overall set lacks a unified naming story.

Tool Count1/5

34 tools is already on the high side, but the real problem is scope: only 3 tools (list_dataflows, dataflow_structure, get_data) relate to the server's stated UNICEF purpose, while the other 31 are an unrelated grab bag of Pipeworx research, prediction-market betting, memory utilities, npm scanning, and llms.txt generation. This is a severe mismatch between count and purpose.

Completeness2/5

For the UNICEF domain implied by the server name, the surface is minimal: browse, structure, and fetch data cover read-only access but nothing else, and the overwhelming majority of tools are off-domain. If the inferred domain is instead 'Pipeworx + prediction markets', coverage is broad, but then the server name is fundamentally misleading and the UNICEF subset is an incomplete afterthought.

Resources