Skip to main content
Glama
Ownership verified

Server Details

Publish and manage existing HTML presentations from an MCP-capable Agent.

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 ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as a status check for API key acceptance.

Naming Consistency5/5

With a single tool, naming consistency is not an issue. The name 'status' is simple and appropriate for its function.

Tool Count2/5

The server provides only one tool, which is too few given the server name 'Slidesfly' implies broader functionality related to slides or presentations. A single status check does not justify the server's purpose.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete. It offers only a status check, with no tools to interact with slides, presentations, or any domain-specific resources, which is a major gap.

Available Tools

1 tool
statusAuth statusAInspect

Confirm the Bearer API key is accepted by this hosted MCP endpoint.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a simple check with no side effects. However, it does not specify what response to expect on success or failure, nor any rate limits or other behaviors. It is minimally adequate.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 (no parameters, no output schema, no siblings), the description is largely complete. It could optionally mention the success/error response format, but it is sufficient for an auth-check tool.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description does not need to add parameter information. With no parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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: to confirm that the Bearer API key is accepted. It uses a specific verb ('Confirm') and resource ('the Bearer API key is accepted by this hosted MCP endpoint'). There are no sibling tools, so no differentiation needed.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Since there are no sibling tools, it could at least indicate that this is typically called to verify authentication before making other requests, but it does not.

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

Discussions

rare's avatar
rare3 hours ago

Setup note: this hosted MCP endpoint uses Bearer API-key authentication. Installation, authentication, and tool docs: https://slidesfly.com/docs/mcp?utm_source=glama&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=mcp_directory&utm_content=connector_discussion

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources