yahooslurp
Server Details
Validate Yahoo! Slurp IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Tool Definition Quality
Average 3.8/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Only one tool exists, so there is no ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly described: validating Yahoo! Slurp IP addresses.
The tool name 'validate_ip' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, consistent with the single tool.
A single tool for a server named 'yahooslurp' is very thin. While the tool is focused, the server likely could benefit from additional tools (e.g., listing IP ranges) to cover the domain.
The tool fully addresses its stated purpose of IP validation, but the server's domain (Yahoo Slurp) suggests missing functionality like retrieving the latest IP list or managing configurations.
Available Tools
1 toolvalidate_ipValidate Yahoo! Slurp IPAInspect
Check whether an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Yahoo! Slurp IP address, verified against Yahoo! Slurp's published IP data on seoapi.com.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ip | Yes | The IPv4 or IPv6 address to validate |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions verification against published IP data but does not explicitly state it is a read-only operation, nor does it describe any side effects, rate limits, or authentication needs. Adequate but not thorough.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
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), the description is largely complete. It explains the verification source. However, it does not specify the return value format, which would be helpful for an agent invoking the tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. The schema already defines 'ip' as the address to validate, so the description provides no extra value.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool checks whether an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) is a genuine Yahoo! Slurp IP, verified against published data. It uses specific verb 'Check' and identifies the resource. With no sibling tools, differentiation is not needed.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use or not use the tool. The purpose is straightforward, but no context is provided about prerequisites or alternative approaches. Lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Validate CommonCrawl CCBot IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.
Validate Cốc Cốc Bot IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.
Validate DuckDuckBot IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.
Validate Naver Yeti IP addresses. Remote MCP validate_ip tool.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEmail validation MCP server using MailboxValidator API to determine validity of an email address.3731MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceComprehensive email validation MCP server that checks syntax, MX records, disposable domains, role-based accounts, SPF/DKIM, typo suggestions, and risk scoring.
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceOfficial parseAPI MCP server providing IP/place data, email/phone/domain validation, weather, currency, timezone, and holiday lookups as tools for AI agents.3279MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides MCP tools for IP threat intelligence lookup and enrichment, including single IP lookup, bulk hunting, ASN expansion, and feed status queries.MIT