Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Validate Naver Yeti 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 CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly distinct by default.

Naming Consistency5/5

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

Tool Count3/5

One tool is minimal but may be appropriate for a very narrow purpose like IP validation. It is borderline because the server name 'naverbot' suggests a broader scope, but for a single-function server it is acceptable.

Completeness3/5

The server covers the specific task of validating Naver Yeti IPs, but there are no additional tools for related operations (e.g., listing IP ranges or batch validation). It is complete for its stated purpose but the overall domain seems potentially broader.

Available Tools

1 tool
validate_ipValidate Naver Yeti IPAInspect

Check whether an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Naver Yeti IP address, verified against Naver Yeti'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 provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the data source (seoapi.com) and that the check is 'verified against published IP data', but does not disclose latency, caching, error handling, or whether it performs a live lookup.

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?

Single-sentence description is lean and front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes meaning. No redundancy.

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?

For a simple validation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and data source. It lacks details on return format (e.g., boolean vs string) but is otherwise sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter (ip). The description adds that the IP can be IPv4 or IPv6 and that validation is against Naver Yeti's data, which complements the schema without adding critical missing information.

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 uses specific verb 'check', identifies resource 'IP address', and specifies scope 'genuine Naver Yeti IP' with data source 'published IP data on seoapi.com'. Title corroborates purpose exactly.

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 Naver Yeti IPs but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives. Without sibling tools, the guidance is adequate but not proactive.

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