A
licenseA
qualityA
maintenanceSimple and free publishing of content on the web for AI Agents
2
7,602
MIT
Desvela ARD Registry — free preflight(domain)
by dev.desvela
Server Details
What a domain publishes for AI agents: ai-catalog.json, llms.txt, agents.md, robots.txt rules. Free.
- 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 Definition Quality
A4/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools, preflight and watch, have entirely distinct purposes: one performs a one-time check of a domain's AI publishing files, and the other sets up ongoing monitoring for changes. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Naming Consistency4/5
Both tool names are single verbs (preflight, watch), which is consistent in being imperative actions. However, they lack a noun object for clarity, which is a minor deviation from a strict verb_noun pattern.
Tool Count4/5
Two tools is appropriate for the focused scope of preflight checks and monitoring. The count feels slightly minimal but not insufficient, as the service is purpose-built.
Completeness3/5
The tools cover the core actions—checking and subscribing—but lack a tool to manage or list active watches, relying on external URLs instead. This creates a notable gap in the MCP tool surface.
Available Tools
2 toolspreflightPreflight a domainAInspect
What a domain publishes for AI agents before you touch it: ai-catalog.json (ARD), llms.txt, agents.md, and its robots.txt directives for AI bots (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended…). Served from the Desvela ARD index when fresh (<7 days), live-checked otherwise. Free.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description mentions data source (index vs live-check) and that the tool is free, but with no annotations provided, it does not disclose potential rate limits, auth requirements, or error handling (e.g., invalid domain).
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 two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and contains no filler words. Every sentence provides useful information.
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?
For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return content, data freshness, and cost. It could mention that it's non-destructive, but overall it is sufficiently complete.
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?
The schema has one parameter 'domain' with a pattern but no description. The description does not add extra meaning about the parameter beyond implying it is a domain name. Since schema coverage is 0%, more detail would help.
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 retrieves a domain's AI agent publications (ai-catalog.json, llms.txt, agents.md, robots.txt directives). It differentiates from the sibling 'watch' by implying a one-time check ('before you touch it').
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 phrase 'before you touch it' implies a preliminary one-shot check, contrasting with the sibling 'watch' (likely for monitoring). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
watchWatch a domain for agent-surface changesAInspect
Subscribe to a domain: get a signed webhook (X-Desvela-Signature, HMAC-SHA256) when what it publishes for AI agents changes — ai-catalog.json entries added/changed/gone, llms.txt or agents.md edited or removed, robots.txt AI-bot directives changed. Checked weekly against the Desvela ARD index. Returns a manage_token (GET/DELETE https://registry.desvela.dev/watch/{id}) and the signing secret — store both.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | Yes | ||
| webhook_url | Yes | HTTPS endpoint that will receive signed change notifications |
Tool Definition Quality
A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the signed webhook (HMAC-SHA256), specific change triggers, weekly check frequency, and return values (manage_token, secret, and endpoints). Missing details on rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if domain is invalid, but still transparent for a subscription tool.
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 a single sentence that packs essential information: action, webhook signature, trigger events, frequency, and return values. It is concise but could be broken into shorter sentences for readability. No fluff, but slightly dense.
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 no output schema, the description covers return values (manage_token, secret) and management endpoints (GET/DELETE URL). It explains the webhook signature and detection scope. Missing details on webhook payload format or how to use the manage token, but sufficient for core functionality.
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 50% (only webhook_url has a description). The tool description adds context about the domain (the domain to watch) but doesn't explain the pattern or provide examples. For webhook_url, the schema already says 'HTTPS endpoint', and the description reinforces it. Overall, adds some value but incomplete for the domain parameter.
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 subscribes to a domain for changes, enumerates what changes are detected (ai-catalog.json, llms.txt, agents.md, robots.txt), and mentions the signed webhook mechanism. It distinguishes from the sibling 'preflight' by being a subscription tool rather than a test or validation tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use when wanting to be notified of domain changes for AI agents, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No mention of prerequisites or comparison with the sibling tool 'preflight' (e.g., suggesting preflight for testing before subscribing).
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!
Related MCP Servers
- Flicense-qualityCmaintenanceMachine-readable directory of AI products that register themselves, plus an agent-readability grader for any URL.
- Flicense-qualityBmaintenanceA shared distillation cache for AI agents — clean-crawl a URL once, distill it to token-optimal markdown, and serve it content-addressed across every agent (~73–89% fewer tokens). Includes a collective-notes layer and cutoff-aware change detection.
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to extract, validate, and discover documentation from websites using llms.txt and install.md standards.1732Inno Setup