Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

BotsRated (beta)

by com.botsrated
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check my MCP setup

check_mcp_setup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call this when you want to check the MCP servers in your config or a list of hosts. Free. Same report as POST /v1/dependency-watch/report: up to 50 hosts or an mcp.json. Each server comes back with its last handshake, tool count, tools-hash change date and receipt link. Then watch up to 3 hosts free, or use Desk for more. Nothing is fetched or stored.

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": "check_mcp_setup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoHost list or mcp.json text
hostsNoHostnames, a list, or one host per line
configNomcp.json object or text, same as mcp_json
mcp_jsonNomcp.json object. Only each server's url, serverUrl or httpUrl hostname is read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavior the annotations would not otherwise reveal: the tool is free, it caps the input at 50 hosts or one mcp.json, and 'Nothing is fetched or stored'. It does not explain what 'last handshake' or 'tools-hash change date' mean operationally.

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?

The trigger condition is front-loaded and the tool's purpose, limits and return shape come next. The sentence 'Then watch up to 3 hosts free, or use Desk for more' is a promotional upsell that blends into the functional content, slightly hurting scannability. Otherwise the description is efficient.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields (last handshake, tool count, tools-hash change date, receipt link). Combined with the annotations, an agent has enough to call the tool and interpret the response. Only the interrelationship of the four input parameters remains underspecified.

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 description coverage is 100%, and all four parameters are independently documented, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description notes the two input modes (a host list or an mcp.json) and the 50-host cap, which adds some meaning. However, it does not explain how 'text', 'hosts', 'config' and 'mcp_json' overlap or when to pick one over another.

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 description states a specific verb and resource: checking the MCP servers in your config or a list of hosts. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not name or contrast a sibling such as 'check' or 'report', leaving the agent to infer the difference from the context of the names alone.

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 when-to-use guidance is explicit: 'Call this when you want to check the MCP servers in your config or a list of hosts.' It also signals the follow-up path ('watch up to 3 hosts free'), which helps an agent route a subsequent call to a sibling. It never states when not to use it or how it differs from 'check' or 'report'.

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

All BotsRated (beta) 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