Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

YourAITools MCP Hub

by co.youraitools
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

ToolFit: Diff a tool list against a pin

diff_tools
Read-onlyIdempotent

What changed in a tool list since you approved it? Compares "tools" or "url" now with "pin" (set_id from audit_tools/diff_tools) or "baseline" (earlier definitions). Each change is labeled breaking (removed tool or param, new required param, type or enum removal), suspicious (new text with injection patterns or hidden characters), review (description, title, annotation or new tool) or additive; descriptions come with before/after text and a word diff. Returns a new pin. Free: 20 calls/day per IP (shared with audit_tools), then $0.002 via x402 or credits. Not for: a first audit (use audit_tools to create the pin).

[ToolFit via YourAITools MCP Hub] Free tier: same as ToolFit's own MCP server (call without payment and without tier). Paid: diff $0.002 per call, with a credits key (Authorization: Bearer yatc_...) or x402 (USDC; the hub returns the payment terms). Failed tool calls aren't charged: credits are refunded automatically and x402 payments only settle on success.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "diff_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pinNoA pin (set_id "ts_..." from an earlier ToolFit call) to compare against.
urlNoPublic remote MCP server URL (Streamable HTTP, https), e.g. https://api.youraitools.co/mcp/hub. ToolFit only lists its tools.
tierNoPaid tier: diff $0.002. Omit tier (with no credits key or x402 payment) to use the free tier.
toolsNoTool definitions: MCP tools/list entries, OpenAI {type:"function",function:{...}}, Anthropic {name,description,input_schema}, Gemini functionDeclarations or Bedrock toolSpec. Max 500.
baselineNoInstead of pin: the earlier tool definitions themselves.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / url / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "https://api.youraitools.co/mcp/hub"
+]
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / baseline / items / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / baseline / items / properties / inputSchema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / tools / items / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / tools / items / properties / inputSchema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: output shape (each change labeled breaking/suspicious/review/additive, before/after text plus word diff), that a new pin is returned, the free-tier limit (20 calls/day shared with audit_tools), paid price, and that failed calls are refunded. The one mild tension is that "returns a new pin" implies persistence under readOnlyHint=true/idempotentHint=true, which is not reconciled.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the purpose question, then the anchor pairing, then the exclusion, then commerce details — a sensible order. The closing pricing/refund block is boilerplate-heavy and repeats price information already stated mid-paragraph, costing some brevity.

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?

With no output schema, the description still describes the return value in enough detail (labeled change classes, before/after text, word diff, new pin) to plan on. Limits, payment modes, refund behavior and the alternative tool are all covered, leaving nothing an agent needs before calling.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the pairing logic the schema never states as a constraint: compare "tools" or "url" against either "pin" or "baseline". It also ties the tier enum to pricing and the free-tier fallback.

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?

Names a specific verb (diff/compare) and resource (a tool list) and immediately frames the scope: current "tools"/"url" vs a "pin" or "baseline". It also enumerates the change categories produced (breaking, suspicious, review, additive), so an agent knows exactly what class of operation this is versus audit_tools or scan_tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes away from the wrong sibling: "Not for: a first audit (use audit_tools to create the pin)." It also gives the selection rule between the two comparison anchors (use "pin" from an earlier call, or "baseline" with the earlier definitions inline). No inference is required.

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

All YourAITools MCP Hub toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources