list_regulatorsSearch/list iGaming regulators (UKGC, MGA, GGL, ANJ, etc.).
query: free-text, matches regulator name and aliases (icontains).
country: exact ISO country match.
cursor: opaque pagination cursor from a previous response.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| country | No | ||
| page_size | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=true; the description adds meaningful behavior details beyond that, such as query using icontains matching on aliases, country being an exact ISO match, and cursor being an opaque pagination token. This gives the agent useful expectations without contradicting the annotation.
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 brief and well-structured, starting with the tool's purpose and then breaking out parameter details. Every line adds value with no wasted words or repetition of schema defaults.
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?
With an output schema present and a read-only annotation, the description covers the essential functional aspects: filtering, matching semantics, and pagination. The lack of explicit mention of page_size or a comparison to get_regulator is a minor gap for a straightforward list tool.
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?
Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates by explaining query, country, and cursor with specific semantics. Page_size is omitted, but it is self-explanatory from its name and schema default, so the overall parameter guidance is strong.
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 begins with 'Search/list iGaming regulators' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It names example regulators and distinguishes from the sibling get_regulator by indicating a plural list/search capability.
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?
The description clearly implies usage for searching or listing regulators by name/country, providing concrete filter semantics. It doesn't explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use it.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct entity (slots, providers, regulators, series, features, themes, news, jobs, sources) with clear resource boundaries. Slight overlap between list_provider_slots and search_slots (both can filter by provider) and between list_series/get_series could cause occasional confusion, but descriptions detail when to use each.
Most tools follow a predictable verb_noun pattern: get_ for singular detail, list_ for directory listing, search_ for free-text search. The pattern is consistent across entities (get_slot, list_slots, search_slots; get_provider, list_providers, search_providers). Minor deviations: 'get_demand_cut' does not follow the get_<entity> pattern, and 'list_provider_slots' uses a compound noun rather than a simple plural.
17 tools is on the higher side but well-scoped for a multi-domain reference data server covering slots, providers, regulators, taxonomies, news, and jobs. Each tool serves a distinct purpose, and the count is justified by the breadth of the domain. Not excessive given the completeness of coverage.
The tool surface thoroughly covers the reference data domain: slots have search/detail/demand/series listing, providers have search/detail/demand/slots, regulators have list/detail, taxonomies (features/themes) are enumerable, and news/jobs have listing with filters. Minor gaps include no detail endpoint for individual news articles or jobs, and no direct get by ID for slots/providers (slugs serve that role), but agents can work around these.