Skip to main content
Glama

turva-mcp

by dev.turva
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Contact and operator details

get_contact
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns who runs turva.dev and the official ways to reach it: the operator and business details, the email address, the Signal link, the LinkedIn profile, the correspondence languages, the first-reply time and the access an audit needs. Use this when a user asks who is behind turva.dev, how to contact it, how to start an audit or what access has to be granted. For what is sold and what it costs use get_services instead. Read-only: returns static JSON that is compiled into the Worker, so it changes nothing and updates only on deploy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
signalYes
linkedinYes
locationYes
operatorYes
engagementYes
business_idYes
first_replyYes
channel_noteYes
how_to_startYes
correspondence_languagesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / operator
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "background": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "business_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "company_page": {
+      "description": "The turva.dev page that states the business details.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "legal_form": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "location": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "run_by": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "team": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "vat_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "name",
+    "run_by",
+    "legal_form",
+    "business_id",
+    "vat_id",
+    "location",
+    "team",
+    "background",
+    "company_page"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "email",
-  "signal",
-  "linkedin",
-  "business_id",
-  "location",
-  "engagement",
-  "correspondence_languages",
-  "first_reply",
-  "channel_note",
-  "how_to_start"
-]New value: +[
+  "email",
+  "signal",
+  "linkedin",
+  "business_id",
+  "location",
+  "engagement",
+  "correspondence_languages",
+  "first_reply",
+  "channel_note",
+  "how_to_start",
+  "operator"
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "business_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "channel_note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "correspondence_languages": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "email": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "engagement": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "first_reply": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "how_to_start": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "linkedin": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "location": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "signal": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "email",
+    "signal",
+    "linkedin",
+    "business_id",
+    "location",
+    "engagement",
+    "correspondence_languages",
+    "first_reply",
+    "channel_note",
+    "how_to_start"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and idempotent, and the description adds valuable context beyond them: it 'returns static JSON that is compiled into the Worker, so it changes nothing and updates only on deploy.' This tells the agent the result is stable and side-effect free.

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 front-loads the core purpose and return contents, then adds targeted usage guidance, an alternative-tool pointer, and a concise behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

For a parameterless tool with an output schema, the description is fully complete: it enumerates the returned contact details, explains when to call it, names the sibling to avoid, and discloses its static read-only nature. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain about parameter usage. The schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 names a specific verb ('Returns') and a precise resource: who runs turva.dev and the official contact/audit-access details. It also distinguishes itself from get_services by naming the alternative explicitly, making the tool's unique role clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this when a user asks who is behind turva.dev, how to contact it, how to start an audit or what access has to be granted.' It also excludes the sibling alternative: 'For what is sold and what it costs use get_services instead.'

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

All turva-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources