Skip to main content
Glama

Agentalog — Agent Auto Log

by com.agentalog
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check tool

check_tool
Read-onlyIdempotent

Before installing a remote MCP server, check its address: signals from the address itself (consumer tunnel, no TLS), the catalog listings with that address or host and their security level, and facts about its domain. Never visits the address. Send the endpoint URL. The answer never contacts that address: it reads what our weekly visits measured and what our domain data knows. address_signals comes from the address alone (consumer tunnel, http:// without TLS). records lists the catalog listings with this exact address first (exato: true), then up to 20 others on the same host, each with its level and signals; same_host counts them all. domain has the facts about the host's domain. An address outside the catalog answers no_catalogo: false and register: submit it to get it reviewed. Cached for 5 minutes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe http(s) endpoint of the MCP server, without credentials.
retry_keyNoOptional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / api_pass
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "MAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, but the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond them: it emphasizes twice that the address is never contacted and results come from prior weekly visits, describes the contents of each returned group, and discloses 5-minute caching tied to the optional retry_key.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening is well front-loaded, but the no-contact guarantee is stated twice ('Never visits the address' and 'The answer never contacts that address'), and the response-field walkthrough is dense back-to-back prose. Roughly a third of the text is redundant with itself rather than with structured data.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only lookup tool with no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting of explaining the shape of the response (signals, records with exato/same_host, domain facts) and the no-contact guarantee. It omits error behavior for malformed URLs or non-endpoint input, which is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema; the description restates 'send the endpoint URL' without adding format or constraint details beyond the schema's 'without credentials'. The retry_key caching tie-in is the only marginal addition, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('check its address' before installing a remote MCP server) and enumerates the three data groups it returns: address_signals, records, domain. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like listing_security or mcp_index_signals, which target catalog listings rather than an arbitrary endpoint URL.

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?

Gives clear triggering context ('before installing a remote MCP server') and a fallback path: an address outside the catalog returns no_catalogo: false, and the 'register' field tells the agent to submit it for review. It does not explicitly name competing tools (e.g., listing_security) or state when this check is unnecessary.

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

All Agentalog — Agent Auto Log toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context Every Agent Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and keep it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources