Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Utilities Hosted

by dev.workers.agent-utilities.agent-utilities
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

security_header_audit

Read-only

Review supplied response headers for selected security and CORS issues without echoing values. FREE during validation. No key, credits or wallet. Existing source and input limits apply.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
requestIdNoOptional legacy field; ignored in free mode.
maxPriceMicroUsdNoOptional legacy field; ignored in free mode.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeYes
findingsYes
headerNamesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / description
      Previous value: -"Explicit maximum new debit; 0 means recovery only."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."
    • removedInput schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / maximum
      Removed value: -999999999999
    • changedInput schema / properties / requestId / description
      Previous value: -"Persist the ID returned by agent_utilities_prepare. Reuse after uncertainty."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."
    • removedInput schema / properties / requestId / pattern
      Removed value: -"^\\d{13}_[A-Za-z0-9_-]{16,80}$"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "input",
-  "requestId",
-  "maxPriceMicroUsd"
-]New value: +[
+  "input"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it will not echo header values, it is free during validation, and requires no key, credits, or wallet. The vague 'existing source and input limits apply' 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the purpose sentence, followed by concise cost and access notes. The two sentences 'FREE during validation' and 'No key, credits or wallet' are somewhat redundant, and the final limits sentence is vague, slightly reducing efficiency.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has an output schema and annotations covering safety, so the description need not explain return values or read-only behavior. However, it leaves 'selected security and CORS issues' undefined and does not clarify input format or limits, which are meaningful gaps for an audit tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67%, and the key 'input.headers' parameter has no schema description. The description only says 'supplied response headers' and vaguely mentions 'existing source and input limits', adding no format, structure, or limit details beyond what the schema already defines.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Review') and resource ('supplied response headers') with scope ('selected security and CORS issues'). Clear purpose, but it does not name or distinguish itself from sibling security_csp_audit or security_cookie_audit, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives cost and privacy context ('FREE during validation', 'No key, credits or wallet') but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It does not say when to choose this tool over security_csp_audit, security_cookie_audit, or other security tools.

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

All Agent Utilities Hosted toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources