Bundle multiple URLs into one short link. QR codes, access counters, redirect lookup. Free.
Bundle multiple URLs into a single short link on UURL.at. Returns the short URL and QR code URLs (.svg and .png). Use this when you want to share multiple reference links as one URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| urls | Yes | List of URLs to bundle (1-12 URLs, each must start with https:// or http://). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains the action (bundle) and outputs (short URL, QR codes), but does not mention side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential errors. For a simple creation tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.
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 extremely concise: two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the action and key returns; the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It explains the action, return values, and usage context. It could mention expected response format or error cases, but the schema covers parameter constraints.
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?
The input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'urls' parameter. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline is 3 for high coverage. No extra value is provided.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose: bundling multiple URLs into a single short link on UURL.at. It also lists the return values (short URL, QR code URLs) and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_bundle'.
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 includes an explicit usage hint: 'Use this when you want to share multiple reference links as one URL.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or directly compare with alternatives beyond the sibling tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Retrieve the URLs and metadata from a UURL.at short link, including QR code URLs. Use this to inspect what URLs are behind a uurl.at link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| rid | Yes | The 6-character short ID from the URL (e.g. 'Ab3cDe' from https://uurl.at/Ab3cDe). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool retrieves data, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. It does add value by stating the inclusion of QR code URLs, but more behavioral details would improve transparency.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys purpose and usage in minimal space.
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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately hints at the return type (URLs, metadata, QR codes). However, it does not specify the format or structure of the metadata, which could be important for an agent. The sibling tool is not contrasted, but overall the description is sufficient for a basic 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?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'rid', which is well described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema for this parameter; it only restates the tool's overall purpose. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not exceed.
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 clearly states it retrieves URLs and metadata from a UURL.at short link, including QR code URLs. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'URLs and metadata' are specific, and the purpose is distinct from the sibling 'bundle_urls' (which likely creates bundles rather than inspecting them).
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 says to use this tool to inspect what URLs are behind a uurl.at link, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., bundle_urls might be used to create links instead).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.
HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Short links you can re-point after printing the QR, with click analytics. Free QR, no key.
Free URL shortener: manage short links, QR codes and click analytics from AI clients.
Dynamic, editable QR codes + short links with scan analytics and branded QR rendering.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The two tools have perfectly distinct purposes: bundle_urls creates a new bundle from multiple URLs, while get_bundle retrieves information about an existing bundle. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection unambiguous.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (bundle_urls, get_bundle) with clear action-object naming. The naming is predictable and follows the same convention throughout.
With only 2 tools, the server feels too thin for a bundling service. While it covers creation and retrieval, typical URL management services would benefit from additional operations like listing bundles, updating, or deleting them. The scope is incomplete for practical use.
The tool set is severely incomplete for a URL bundling domain. It lacks essential operations such as listing existing bundles, updating bundle contents, deleting bundles, or managing bundle metadata. Agents will hit dead ends when trying to perform common lifecycle management tasks.
