Skip to main content
Glama

Tollmint

by com.tollmint

design_ai-slop-detect

Score how closely a page matches the documented 2025-2026 AI/template design fingerprint: the Tailwind indigo-violet gradient, a default sans with no display pairing, the badge/hero/three-card/steps/testimonial/pricing skeleton, glassmorphism, uniform border radii, emoji feature bullets, round-number social proof with no attribution, and abstract illustration in place of the product. Each finding quotes the markup that produced it and names the move that breaks the pattern. Deterministic and model-free. Reports template convergence, never authorship — the same fingerprint appears in human sites built from the same tutorials. Costs $0.025000 per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoPage to analyse. Fetched respecting robots.txt.
htmlNoRaw HTML, if you already have it. Takes precedence over url.
fail_above_scoreNoSet a verdict of "fail" above this score. Useful for gating a design review in CI.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides good behavioral context: it is deterministic, model-free, reports template convergence not authorship, and states cost. However, it does not explain error handling or precedence when both url and html are provided.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose and is informative, though somewhat dense. It could be slightly more concise, but all sentences add value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the lack of output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (findings with quotes and moves). It covers complexity well, including cost and behavior.

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%, so the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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: scoring a page against a specific AI/template design fingerprint. It lists concrete design elements and distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on template detection.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of when not to use it. The context for usage is implied but not stated.

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

All Tollmint toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

All 20 tools have clearly distinct purposes, grouped by domain prefixes (content_ai, design_ai, legal, psych, ref, tollmint, web). Even similar-sounding tools like psych_dark-pattern-detect and psych_dark-patterns are differentiated as a live scanner versus a reference taxonomy. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming mostly follows a prefix_descriptive pattern, but some tools use hyphens (content_ai-score, design_ai-slop-detect) while others use underscores (legal_accessibility, psych_biases). This minor inconsistency prevents a perfect score, but the pattern is still clear and readable.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is slightly above the typical 'well-scoped' range, but each tool serves a specific, justifiable need across multiple domains (legal, psychology, content analysis, geocoding, internal). The count feels comprehensive rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers all major areas implied by the domain prefixes: comprehensive legal compliance references, extensive psychology/behavioral design tools, content and design analysis, geocoding, and internal server management. No obvious gaps for the intended use cases.

Resources