StitchAPI Docs
Server Details
Search and read the StitchAPI docs: search_docs finds relevant sections, get_doc reads a page.
- 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 4.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_docs for querying and retrieving excerpts, and get_doc for fetching full pages. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (search_docs, get_doc) and are descriptive of their actions, making the naming predictable and clear.
With only 2 tools, the set is minimal but sufficient for a documentation server's core functions (search and retrieval). It could be slightly expanded with metadata or listing tools, but it's well-scoped for its purpose.
The tool surface covers the essential workflow: searching for relevant sections and retrieving full documents. There are no dead ends or obvious gaps for a read-only documentation API.
Available Tools
2 toolsget_docAInspect
Fetch a full StitchAPI documentation page as Markdown — the "read the whole thing" escape hatch for a search_docs hit. Pass a url (as returned by search_docs) or a slug like "guides/resilience/throttle".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Page URL from search_docs (absolute or /docs/…). | |
| slug | No | Page slug, e.g. "guides/resilience/throttle". |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states a read operation (fetch) but does not disclose error handling, parameter exclusivity, or response format beyond 'as Markdown'. The behavior is simple, but more detail would improve transparency.
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 long, no redundant words. The first sentence states the purpose and distinguishes from sibling, the second provides parameter guidance. Every sentence adds value.
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?
The tool has only two optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and parameter usage but lacks detail on the return value (beyond 'as Markdown') and whether both parameters can be omitted. Given the simplicity, it's adequate but not fully complete.
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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the origin of the 'url' (from search_docs) and providing a concrete example for 'slug' (e.g., 'guides/resilience/throttle'), as well as clarifying the exclusive use of one parameter ('Pass a url... or a slug').
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 it fetches a full StitchAPI documentation page as Markdown and distinguishes from the sibling 'search_docs' by calling itself the 'escape hatch' for getting the whole thing.
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 explicitly says to use it after a search_docs hit and explains the two parameter options (url from search_docs or a slug). While it doesn't mention when not to use it, the context implies it's for when search_docs snippets are insufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_docsAInspect
Search the StitchAPI documentation semantically (hybrid BM25 + vector). Returns the most relevant doc sections as excerpts with deep links — never full pages. Follow up with get_doc to read a full page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results to return (default 5). | |
| query | Yes | Natural-language search query. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses the search method (hybrid BM25+vector), the nature of returns (excerpts, not full pages), and the follow-up action. With no annotations, it adequately covers behavioral traits for a read-only search tool, though could add more detail on result ordering or error handling.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states action and method; second provides key constraint and workflow. Front-loaded and efficient.
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?
For a simple search tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, constraints, and usage flow. Could mention the excerpt format or pagination, but not critical 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 already fully describes both parameters (100% coverage). Description adds no new parameter-specific details, only general context about the search approach, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description clearly states it searches the StitchAPI documentation semantically, returns excerpts with deep links, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling get_doc which retrieves full pages.
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?
Provides explicit follow-up guidance to use get_doc for full pages, indicating the optimal usage flow and when to switch 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!