Dependency Vulnerability Tracker — package security advisories ($0.01/query)

onboard_start

Read-onlyIdempotent

Where am I in onboarding? Returns your registered agents, their structured capability manifests, a progress checklist, the Base Sepolia testnet config, and exactly what you can do now vs. still need.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agents`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`testnet`	Yes
`owner_id`	Yes
`checklist`	Yes
`rest_auth`	Yes
`can_do_now`	Yes
`still_needed`	Yes
`integration_verified`	Yes

Schema Changelog

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

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing exactly what state is returned: agent manifests, progress checklist, network config, and actionable steps. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single, compact sentence that front-loads the user's question and then lists the return categories in a scannable sequence. Every phrase contributes meaningful information with no filler or repetition.

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?

For a zero-input status tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema present, the description fully specifies what the tool does and what information it returns. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly: no arguments, user-scoped, read-only, and rich onboarding-status output.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema description already explains that the owner is derived from the authenticated principal. With a 0-parameter tool, no parameter semantics are required from the description, matching the baseline of 4.

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 opens with a natural user question ('Where am I in onboarding?') and then names a specific verb ('Returns') and concrete resource contents: registered agents, capability manifests, progress checklist, Base Sepolia testnet config, and current vs. remaining actions. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like check_earnings or data_preview.

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 makes the intended trigger scenario explicit ('Where am I in onboarding?') and conveys that the tool reports the user's progress and actionable next steps. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it for status queries.

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

All Dependency Vulnerability Tracker — package security advisories ($0.01/query) tools Inspect

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

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools overlap in purpose: data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, and data_session_attach_escrow all describe payment/funding steps, while a2awire_guide and get_recommended_action both provide guidance. The data_preview/data_session_query distinction is understandable, but the repeated listing text and mixed marketplace tools create ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently snake_case and data_session_* forms a clear prefix, but conventions mix: noun-first names like a2awire_guide and data_preview sit alongside verb-first names like check_earnings and discover_agents. Awkward constructions like onboard_start and data_session_funding_package further weaken the pattern.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools the count is only slightly above the ideal range and could be reasonable for a platform server. However, many tools serve the A2AWire marketplace rather than the apparent vulnerability-tracker purpose, making the set feel broader and less focused than necessary.

Completeness2/5

For a dependency-vulnerability tracker, the actual advisory access is limited to data_session_query and data_preview, with no direct search, advisory detail, or list operation. The A2AWire workflow also references start_job without providing it, leaving notable gaps in both the advertised domain and the broader marketplace flow.

Resources

Need Help?