Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

x402-gated safety checker for npm and PyPI packages. Built for AI coding agents to call before running npm install or pip install — flags nonexistent/typosquatted names, known CVEs (OSV.dev), and suspiciously new or low-download packages. $0.005 USDC per check on Base mainnet

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 DescriptionsA

Average 3.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

Only one tool exists, so there is no ambiguity or potential for misselection between different tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

With a single tool, naming is trivially consistent. The name 'check_package_safety' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool is borderline for the server's purpose of checking npm and PyPI package safety. While it covers the basic need, the surface feels thin and could benefit from additional tools like separate checks per ecosystem or advanced reporting.

Completeness4/5

The tool performs its stated function of checking package safety. Minor gaps might include lack of detailed vulnerability information or batch checking, but for a single-purpose query tool, the coverage is largely adequate.

Available Tools

1 tool
check_package_safetyAInspect

Check whether an npm or PyPI package is safe to install. Costs $0.005 USDC via x402 per call.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesExact package name to check for safety before installing
ecosystemYesPackage ecosystem to check
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the cost per call, which is useful, but fails to describe what 'safe' means, the response format (e.g., boolean, detailed report), or whether it makes network requests. Key behavioral aspects like error handling or latency are absent.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and includes a critical cost note. No redundant words or information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

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 should clarify what the return value looks like (e.g., safe/unsafe, details). It does not. The description also lacks context on what the safety check entails or limitations (e.g., check scope, update frequency). Incomplete 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.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage, both parameters have descriptions that fully explain their roles. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the work.

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 checks package safety for npm or PyPI. The verb 'check' and resource 'package safety' are specific and unambiguous. No siblings exist, so differentiation is not required.

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 implies usage before installing a package and mentions cost as a consideration. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (none provided) or when not to use it. Could be more direct about its role in the installation workflow.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources