Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

QuoAPI

by com.quoapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Inspect QuoAPI runtime status

quoapi.inspect
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read-only RUNTIME STATUS of the QuoAPI MCP gateway, not a provider execution. With no arguments returns state, server protocol version, tool count, visible capability count and discovery/registry revisions. Optional capability handle adds public context only: this is not to test upstream execution, a live upstream health probe, credentials or tenant authorization. Use quoapi.describe for schemas, pricing and auth; quoapi.search to discover handles; quoapi.execute for approved actions. Unknown handles return capability_not_mcp_visible; status incurs no upstream charges.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "quoapi.inspect"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
capabilityNoOptional exact canonical handle from quoapi.search (e.g. address.validate) to include publicly visible capability context. Omit to inspect the gateway overall; use quoapi.describe for schemas.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/no-destructive/no-open-world, yet the description adds cost behavior ('status incurs no upstream charges'), an error outcome ('Unknown handles return capability_not_mcp_visible'), and the exact shape of the returned status fields despite there being no output schema. This is real disclosure beyond structured fields.

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 and a dense single paragraph that earns most of its words. Minor redundancy in the overlapping phrase 'not to test upstream execution, a live upstream health probe', which repeats the same exclusion twice.

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 one-optional-parameter read-only inspection tool with no output schema, the description supplies return contents, error behavior, cost implications, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already explains the optional capability handle, so baseline is 3. The description adds the failure semantics for unknown handles and clarifies the handle yields 'public context only', not tenant-scoped data.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource and scope: 'Read-only RUNTIME STATUS of the QuoAPI MCP gateway', and immediately negates the most likely confusion ('not a provider execution'). An agent can distinguish this from quoapi.execute without opening 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes each sibling: quoapi.describe for schemas/pricing/auth, quoapi.search to discover handles, quoapi.execute for approved actions. It also states when not to use it ('not to test upstream execution, a live upstream health probe, credentials or tenant authorization'), leaving nothing to inference.

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

All QuoAPI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources