Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Validate Amazonbot and Amzn-SearchBot IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.

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 3.8/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceB
Disambiguation5/5

Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'validate_ip' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent though there is only one tool.

Tool Count1/5

A server named 'amazon' with only one tool for IP validation is extremely thin and does not match the implied broad scope of Amazon services.

Completeness1/5

With just one tool covering a very specific niche (Amazonbot IP validation), the tool surface is severely incomplete for any general Amazon-related purpose.

Available Tools

1 tool
validate_ipValidate Amazonbot IPAInspect

Check whether an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Amazonbot IP address, verified against Amazonbot's published IP data on seoapi.com.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ipYesThe IPv4 or IPv6 address to validate
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions verification against a data source (seoapi.com) but does not state whether the operation is safe, has side effects, or requires permissions. The straightforward nature of an IP validation suggests read-only behavior, but this is only implied.

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 19-word sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's function. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information, earning its place.

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

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, and the verification source. However, it does not specify the return value (likely a boolean), which is a minor gap for completeness.

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 covers the single 'ip' parameter fully (100% coverage), with a clear description. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, which is adequate for this simple parameter.

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's purpose: checking if an IP (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Amazonbot IP, verified against published data. It is specific about the resource (Amazonbot IP) and the action (check/validate). 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 Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context (verifying Amazonbot IPs) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites. Since there are no sibling tools, the lack of exclusions is not penalized heavily, but guidance on when to apply the check is absent.

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