Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Reports the launch status of YK Blueprint.

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 4.3/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceB
Disambiguation5/5

With only a single tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The purpose of 'launch_status' is clearly described as reporting the current launch status.

Naming Consistency5/5

The tool name 'launch_status' is clear and follows a readable compound pattern. With only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained.

Tool Count1/5

The server has exactly one tool, which is a trivial single operation. This is an extreme under-scoping for a server named 'YK Blueprint', which implies a broader purpose.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface consists solely of a launch status report. There are no creation, modification, or deletion operations, making the server severely incomplete for any plausible blueprint management or status monitoring workflow.

Available Tools

1 tool
launch_statusLaunch statusA
Read-onlyIdempotent
Inspect

Reports the current launch status of YK Blueprint.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which fully cover the safety profile. The description adds only the 'current' aspect, which suggests a snapshot but does not elaborate on return format or side effects. This is acceptable but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning, making it appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters and simple behavior.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, strong annotations), the description is complete enough. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and annotations cover the behavioral constraints.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because the description and schema are aligned and nothing more is needed.

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 a specific verb 'Reports' and clearly identifies the resource 'current launch status of YK Blueprint'. It precisely conveys the tool's function, and since there are 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.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly implies the tool is used when you need the current launch status. There are no alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous for a simple status-check tool.

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!

Related MCP Servers

  • F
    license
    -
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Provides unified project context and monitoring capabilities including project health metrics, build diagnostics, Git integration, and infrastructure validation to initialize development sessions with comprehensive project information.
  • A
    license
    -
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Enables LLM clients to inspect local dev environments—Docker container health, pnpm workspace integrity, and stuck process detection—without manual terminal copy-pasting.
    MIT

View all MCP Servers

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources