Skip to main content
Glama

meta-agent-tools

by com.agentalog
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

MCP index signals

mcp_index_signals
Read-onlyIdempotent

Does this MCP server still answer, with which access, and is its repository alive? What independent MCP indexes measured about one listing of this catalog, each credited with its license. Take the id from list_listings. A signal belongs to a listing only when it is the SAME object: the name in the official MCP registry, the exact remote endpoint URL or the GitHub owner/repo, in that order. A shared domain never matches — two servers on one host are different products. Up to 20 signals, one per index and record.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listingYesListing id from list_listings.
api_passNoMAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.
retry_keyNoOptional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / api_pass
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "MAT-only private pass: mat_<32 random hex>_<64 random hex>. Generate and save before buying.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / retry_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional retry key, up to 80 ASCII characters; same read for five minutes.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the identity-matching rule (registry name, exact endpoint URL, or GitHub owner/repo, in that order; shared domain explicitly excluded) and the output cap of 20 signals, one per index and record. This is meaningful additional disclosure.

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 identity-matching and domain-exclusion sentences earn their place, but the two opening rhetorical questions are stylized filler rather than front-loaded purpose. The ordering buries 'what this tool does' behind questions and could be tightened.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately: signals per index, access level, repo liveness, license attribution, and a 20-signal ceiling. Combined with annotations and 100% schema coverage, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only the precise response shape is left unspecified.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters, including the MAT-only api_pass format and retry_key semantics. The description reinforces 'Take the id from list_listings' but adds no syntax or detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The core is identifiable: it reports what independent MCP indexes measured about one catalog listing (reachability, access mode, repo liveness, license credit). This is distinct from siblings like mcp_index_search (search) and index_stats (aggregate stats). The rhetorical opening questions ('Does this MCP server still answer...') delay the plain verb+resource statement, but the purpose is ultimately clear.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It states 'Take the id from list_listings', which is a useful prerequisite and couples it to the correct sibling. However, it never says when to prefer this over mcp_index_search or get_listing, and gives no when-not guidance. Usage is implied but not explicitly bounded against alternatives.

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

All meta-agent-tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources