PII Redact
Server Details
Scans text for personally identifiable information — emails, phone numbers, SSNs, credit card numbers, physical addresses, names — and returns a redacted version. Built for agents sanitizing user content, support tickets, logs, or documents before storage, sharing, or feeding into another LLM call. Pay-per-call via x402 (USDC on Base): $0.01/call, no account or API key. tools/list and /openapi.json are free for discovery.
- 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.
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.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion or ambiguity.
With a single tool, naming is trivially consistent, though no pattern can be assessed.
A single tool for PII redaction is too few; a server typically needs at least separate detection and redaction, or batch processing, to be practical.
The server provides only redaction, lacking separate detection, batch processing, or customization, leaving significant gaps for typical PII handling workflows.
Available Tools
1 toolredactAInspect
Detect and redact PII in text or JSON. Recognizers are pure pattern/checksum matching (regex + Luhn/mod-97/SSN-area validation) — no LLM calls, no external services. Person names and dates of birth are matched only via nearby context (e.g. 'Mr. Smith', 'DOB: ...'), not general NER, to keep false positives low.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | Yes | ||
| options | No |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the detection mechanism (pattern/checksum, no LLM) and limitations (person names/DOB only via nearby context). It does not explicitly state whether redaction modifies input in-place or returns a copy, which is a minor gap.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and method. Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose and high-level behavior first, then a specific limitation. No redundant or extraneous content.
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 no output schema and limited parameters, the description covers detection approach, input types, and recognition nuances. Missing details include output format (e.g., what replaces redacted text) and full explanation of options parameters, but overall it provides sufficient context for basic usage.
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 description coverage is 0%. The description partially compensates by mentioning 'text or JSON' (aligning with input parameter) and listing recognizable entities (email, phone, etc.) nested in options. However, it does not explain the 'mode' or 'locale' options, leaving some parameters unaddressed.
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 'detect and redact PII in text or JSON', provides specific verb+resource, and explains the detection method (pattern/checksum matching). This unambiguously defines its purpose.
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?
The description implies usage context by stating it uses no LLM calls or external services, indicating it's a lightweight, deterministic option. It also notes limitations on person name/DOB detection to manage expectations. However, explicit 'when to use vs alternative' guidance is absent due to no sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
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
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!