A
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceEnriches person profiles from email addresses, returning full name, job title, company, social links, and location. Works as a drop-in replacement for Apollo person enrichment at lower cost.
MIT
Prism — Data Enrichment for AI Agents
Server Details
People-enrich: work email + phone, company & domain enrichment. Pay-per-call USDC, no key.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
A3.8/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 4.4/5 across 5 of 5 tools scored.
Server CoherenceB
Disambiguation3/5
Most tools are clearly distinct, but list_endpoints and pricing_info both expose endpoint and pricing details, which could cause an agent to call the wrong one. install_snippets, usage_stats, and wallet_helper have separate, well-defined purposes.
Naming Consistency3/5
All names use lowercase snake_case, but the style is mixed: install_snippets and list_endpoints follow verb_noun, while pricing_info, usage_stats, and wallet_helper are noun-based. The naming is readable but not uniform.
Tool Count4/5
Five tools is a reasonable, compact set for an onboarding and payment-helper server. However, for a server branded as 'Data Enrichment', the count reflects meta-support tooling rather than actual enrichment capabilities.
Completeness2/5
The set covers installation, endpoint discovery, pricing, usage stats, and wallet setup, but it includes no actual data-enrichment operations. Given the stated purpose, agents cannot perform the primary task through these tools.
Available Tools
5 toolsinstall_snippetsAInspect
Return ready-to-paste configuration snippets for installing this MCP server in Claude Code, Cursor, Cline, Continue.dev, Windsurf, and Zed. Free.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Full disclosure: returns ready-to-paste snippets, and states it's free. No annotations provided, but description covers behavior completely for a parameterless tool.
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?
Single sentence, 20 words, front-loaded with key information. No unnecessary words.
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?
Describes output (snippets) and target IDEs. Could specify return format (e.g., object with keys per IDE), but sufficient for tool complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist; schema coverage is trivially 100%. Description adds value by explaining the tool's output beyond the empty schema.
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 uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'configuration snippets' for installing this MCP server in multiple IDEs. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_endpoints and pricing_info.
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?
Implicitly indicates usage for obtaining installation snippets, but lacks explicit when-to-use or comparisons to alternatives. For a simple tool, this is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_endpointsAInspect
List all paid endpoints exposed by this MCP server with their prices and live status. Free — no wallet required. Use this first to discover what tools are available.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is free and requires no wallet, which are key behavioral traits. It could add details about output format or pagination, but the transparency is sufficient for a simple list tool.
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?
Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the core function, and the second provides actionable guidance. Perfectly structured for quick comprehension.
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?
Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and output. It explains what is listed (prices, live status) and that it's free, though it could specify the exact return structure. Overall, it's complete enough for its simplicity.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains (prices, live status) and that it's free, going beyond the empty schema.
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 clearly states the tool lists paid endpoints with prices and live status. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on endpoint discovery, not installation, pricing info, usage, or wallet functions.
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 explicitly advises to use this tool first to discover available tools, providing clear timing context. It does not discuss when not to use it, but the guidance is direct and helpful.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
pricing_infoAInspect
Return pricing details for the GoCreative Agent API — base price per call, premium endpoints, cache TTLs, and supported payment networks. Free.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
A4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool is 'Free', which may imply no cost. However, it does not explicitly state side effects, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation. For a simple info tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.
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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Return pricing details'), followed by a list of included items, ending with 'Free'. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema, so the description is the only source for return value structure. It lists categories of information but does not specify the format (e.g., JSON object fields, data types). For a simple pricing endpoint, this may be sufficient, but additional structure would improve completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage. The description adds meaning by detailing the return content (base price per call, premium endpoints, cache TTLs, supported payment networks), which is the sole documentation for the tool's output.
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 clearly states the tool returns pricing details for the API, listing specific items (base price per call, premium endpoints, cache TTLs, supported payment networks). It is distinct from sibling tools like install_snippets or list_endpoints.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for retrieving pricing info, but does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
usage_statsAInspect
Return summary stats of how this MCP server has been used (top tools called, success rate, recent activity). Free. Use to verify your own integration is hitting the right tools.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, but description adequately discloses it's a read-only query returning stats, with mention of 'Free'. No hidden behavioral traits.
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?
Two succinct sentences with no redundant information, front-loaded with key purpose and use case.
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?
Lacks output schema but describes return content (top tools, success rate, recent activity) sufficiently for a simple stats tool.
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?
No parameters exist; description correctly indicates zero input needed. Schema coverage is 100%.
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 clearly states it returns summary stats (top tools, success rate, recent activity) and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like pricing_info or wallet_helper.
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?
Provides a clear use case (verify integration) and notes it's free, but doesn't specify when not to use compared to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
wallet_helperAInspect
Return step-by-step instructions for setting up x402 USDC autopay for this MCP server. Use this if a paid tool returned a 402 error or you're onboarding a new agent that needs to pay for API calls. Free.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description transparently states it returns instructions and is free. No hidden effects or mutations are implied, making the behavior clear.
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 two concise sentences with no redundant information. The purpose and usage are front-loaded, making it efficient for an agent to understand.
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-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its cost implications. No gaps remain.
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?
No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by noting the tool is free, but parameter semantics are inherently not needed.
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 explicitly states the tool returns step-by-step instructions for x402 USDC autopay setup. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on payment configuration, not snippet installation or endpoint listing.
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 directly advises using this tool when a paid tool returns a 402 error or when onboarding a new agent. It provides clear context but does not excludedly state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceReal-time email verification API with syntax, MX, disposable detection, role-based flags, quality score 0-100. Built for agent outreach pipelines with pay-per-call via x402 (USDC on Base L2) -- no API key, no signup, no rate-limit wall.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceValidates phone numbers worldwide (carrier, line type, country) via single or batch requests, with pay-per-call using x402 micropayments (USDC on Base) — no API key required.MIT
LeadEnrich MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceWaterfall lead enrichment for AI agents. Cascades through Apollo, Clearbit, and Hunter to build the most complete lead profile in a single call.62MIT