Skip to main content
Glama

duckduckbot

Server Details

Validate DuckDuckBot 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 DescriptionsB

Average 3.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no potential for confusion. The tool's purpose is clearly distinct by default.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'validate_ip' is clear and follows a sensible verb_noun pattern. Consistency is not an issue with one tool.

Tool Count3/5

The server has only one tool, which is borderline according to the guidelines. While it serves a narrow purpose, a single tool can feel thin, but it is not excessive.

Completeness5/5

For the specific domain of DuckDuckBot IP validation, a single tool that checks IP addresses against published data is sufficient and covers the necessary functionality.

Available Tools

1 tool
validate_ipValidate DuckDuckBot IPBInspect

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

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ipYesThe IPv4 or IPv6 address to validate
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 external verification against published data but omits critical details such as whether the tool makes network calls, potential latency, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error handling behavior.

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 sentence that fully conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the primary action and includes relevant detail (IP versions, verification source). No extraneous 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., boolean, details). It merely says 'check whether' but does not specify the response format. The tool is simple, but the omission of output details makes it incomplete for an AI agent to 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%, meeting the baseline for this dimension. The description merely restates that the IP can be IPv4 or IPv6, which is already in the schema description. It adds no further semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 validates whether an IP address (both IPv4 and IPv6) belongs to DuckDuckBot, using a specific external data source (seoapi.com). The verb 'check' and resource 'genuine DuckDuckBot IP address' leave no ambiguity.

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 the tool is for verifying DuckDuckBot IP addresses but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor mentions prerequisites or when not to use it. With no sibling tools, differentiation is not needed, but explicit usage context 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