Scrub MCP
Server Details
Stateless PII redaction over MCP. scrub_text costs $0.01/call via x402; scrub_health is free.
- 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.
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.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools are completely distinct: one is a health check with no arguments, the other is a full PII scrubbing service with multiple configuration options. No overlap in purpose.
Both tools follow a consistent 'scrub_' prefix with a clear noun (health, text), forming a predictable verb_noun pattern.
With only 2 tools, the server feels slightly thin but appropriate for a focused PII scrubbing service. A health check and a single processing tool are reasonable for a minimal viable server.
The main tool covers text scrubbing with configurable categories and domains, and the health check adds basic monitoring. Missing batch processing or output formatting, but stateless design limits scope. Minor gap.
Available Tools
2 toolsscrub_healthAInspect
Free health check. Reports whether the upstream scrub service is reachable. No payment required, no arguments, no text processed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description covers basic behavior: it's a health check, no payment, no text processing. However, it lacks details on potential side effects or rate limits, though for a health check these are minimal.
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 three sentences with no redundancy, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value.
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?
For a zero-parameter health check tool, the description covers all necessary information, especially given the sibling tool context and lack of output schema.
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 are no parameters, and the description confirms 'no arguments', which fully covers the input schema.
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 clearly states the tool checks if the upstream scrub service is reachable, using the verb 'reports' and the resource 'scrub service'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'scrub_text' by specifying it's a health check.
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?
The description explicitly notes it's free, requires no arguments, and processes no text, implying it should be used for health checks only. While it doesn't name an alternative, the sibling context suggests 'scrub_text' for actual scrubbing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
scrub_textAInspect
Stateless PII scrubbing. Free for text of 1000 words or fewer (whitespace-separated tokens); $0.01 above that. Replaces personal info with placeholder tags like [NAME], [SSN], [EMAIL] plus per-category removal counts. Zero storage: no request or response text is stored, logged, or cached. Configure categories to strip (names, ages, emails, phone, ssn, addresses, dates, account_numbers) and domain (all/medical/legal/financial/criminal). Text input only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | ||
| strip | No | ||
| domain | No | all | |
| temperature | No |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses statelessness, zero storage, and replacement behavior. It lacks detail on rate limits, authentication needs, or exact response structure, but covers key 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is reasonably concise, starting with the core purpose. It mixes pricing, behavior, and configuration in a single paragraph; a more structured layout could improve readability, but it remains effective.
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?
Covers purpose, pricing, privacy, and configuration options. Lacks explicit output format details (beyond placeholder tags and counts) and error handling, leaving some gaps for a tool with no output schema.
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?
Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains three of four parameters (strip list, domain choices, text input). The 'temperature' parameter is left unexplained, but overall adds significant meaning beyond the schema.
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 clearly states it's 'Stateless PII scrubbing' with a specific verb (scrub) and resource (text). It lists replaced tags and removal counts, distinguishing it from the sibling 'scrub_health' tool by mentioning domain options tailored for general use.
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?
Includes pricing thresholds (free under 1000 words) and input type restriction ('Text input only'). However, it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling 'scrub_health' to guide agent selection.
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.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!