Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PublicWWW

by com.publicwww
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Build signatures of a cluster

build_signatures
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find signatures that lead to more websites like the ones in a cluster: their common platform, theme, plugin, tracker, network or owner. Each result is a ready search - pass its search (the query in double quotes) to the search tool to find more such websites. Best on a cluster made by one search or of one network; a mixed cluster may give none. Sorted best first; take the one with the highest in_cluster - how many of the websites looked at have the code (coverage: "4 of 5", in_all: every one of them), websites - rough count in the whole index (null when rarer than websites_max; the search gives the exact number), technology - its name when the code belongs to a technology we know. Spends nothing.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cluster": "<cluster>"
    },
    "name": "build_signatures"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clusterYesCluster id, from list_clusters or create_cluster.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, but the description adds real behavioral value: cost ("Spends nothing"), result ordering ("Sorted best first"), the possibility of zero results on mixed clusters, and a full decode of return fields (in_cluster, coverage like "4 of 5", in_all, websites count with its null condition, technology). With no output schema, this disclosure is exactly what the agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the usage caveat, then result semantics, then cost — a sensible order with no filler sentences. It loses a point for the final run-on sentence whose nested parentheticals (coverage, in_all, websites, technology) are hard to parse on a first read.

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?

There is no output schema, so the return-value explanation is essential and it is fully supplied, including field meanings, null semantics, and the count caveat. Combined with the cost statement and the mixed-cluster caveat, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret results.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter's description already points to list_clusters/create_cluster as the id source. The description adds only loose semantic framing of what a cluster represents (made by one search / one network), so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — find signatures that surface more websites like those in a cluster — and enumerates the signature kinds (platform, theme, plugin, tracker, network, owner). This is clearly distinct from siblings like extract_from_cluster or combine_clusters without needing to open any schema.

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?

Gives a concrete applicability condition ("Best on a cluster made by one search or of one network; a mixed cluster may give none") and routes the agent forward: pass a result's quoted search to the `search` tool. It does not explicitly contrast with extract_from_cluster, which is the main adjacent tool, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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

All PublicWWW 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