Domain DA-PA Checker: Domain authority score & page authority score, spam score, backlink count.
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
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.
Average 2.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool available, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The agent will know exactly which tool to call since there is only one.
'get_v1' appears to be a generic versioned API endpoint name rather than a meaningful tool name for the domain. While there are no inconsistencies with only one tool, the name reveals nothing about its purpose, making it especially unhelpful within a broader tool ecosystem.
A single tool for a domain authority check is on the thin side, even for a narrow niche. The scope feels slightly underdelivered, and an agent would likely benefit from at least one additional tool (e.g., batch checking) to justify its existence as a separate server.
The single tool aggregates the core metrics (DA, PA, spam score, backlinks) into one call, covering the primary workflow of a domain authority checker. Only minor features like historical tracking or bulk lookup are missing, which feels like an acceptable gap for this narrow scope.
get_v1CheckCInspectTarget, Domain Authority Score, Page Authority Score, Spam Score, Total Backlinks Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| target | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does disclose a per-call credit cost and implies a read-only metrics lookup, but it lacks authentication context, required-parameter expectations, failure behavior, or any clarification of return format.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short and includes relevant information, but the metric list and billing clause run together without clear punctuation ('Total Backlinks Billing per call: 1 Credits'). This hurts readability even though the overall length is appropriate.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the primary context. It lists the expected metrics and cost but does not specify the return contract, required input semantics, or boundary conditions, leaving significant gaps for an agent trying to invoke and parse results correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There is one parameter and the schema description coverage is 0%. The description only repeats 'Target' and does not state how the target should be formatted, whether it is required, or what value forms are accepted beyond what the schema title already shows.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description lists domain metrics (Domain Authority Score, Page Authority Score, Spam Score, Total Backlinks) and a target, so the intended purpose can be inferred. However, there is no verb or action statement like 'returns' or 'retrieves', leaving the tool's exact purpose ambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool or how it compares to alternatives. The only extra guidance-like content is 'Billing per call: 1 Credits', which is a cost warning rather than a usage instruction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
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.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!