Ruby on Rails MCP Skills
Server Details
Skill Catalog
The library contains 42 public skills organized by Rails development concern.
Category | Examples |
Planning |
|
Testing |
|
Code quality |
|
Architecture and DDD |
|
Rails imple |
- 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 4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: list_skills lists available skills, and use_skill loads a specific skill. There is no overlap in functionality.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_skills, use_skill), making them predictable and easy to interpret.
With only 2 tools, the set is minimal for the domain of managing skills. While it covers the basic operations (list and use), the count is on the low side of what is typically expected.
For the intended purpose of listing and using Rails Agent Skills, the tool set is complete. It provides all necessary operations to discover and retrieve skill instructions.
Available Tools
2 toolslist_skillsList Rails SkillsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Discover public Rails Agent Skills before loading one with use_skill. Returns names, categories, paths, and routing descriptions only; it does not return full skill bodies. This tool is read-only and has no repository side effects.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| count | Yes | Number of public skills returned. |
| skills | Yes | Public Rails Agent Skills available through use_skill. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only says 'List', which implies a read operation, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only, lacks side effects, or meet other behavioral transparency needs.
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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and concise, with no wasted words.
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?
Given the low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately states the purpose and hints at the tool's context relative to use_skill. It could mention the output format or that it is read-only, but it is mostly 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?
There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but baseline for 0 parameters is 4.
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 lists all public Rails Agent Skills available through use_skill, with a specific verb and resource, and implicitly differentiates from the sibling tool use_skill by hinting that use_skill is for using skills.
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 implies that this tool is for discovering skills before using use_skill, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
use_skillUse Rails SkillARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Read one public Rails Agent Skill by name after selecting it from list_skills. Returns the full SKILL.md instructions plus structured metadata. This tool is read-only and has no repository side effects.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skill_name | Yes | Skill name, for example code-review, write-tests, or build. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Normalized skill name, or null when not found. |
| path | Yes | Repository path to the skill's SKILL.md file, or null when not found. |
| error | Yes | Error message when the skill cannot be loaded. |
| found | Yes | Whether the requested skill was found. |
| content | Yes | Full SKILL.md instructions, or null when not found. |
| category | Yes | Skill category, or null when not found. |
| description | Yes | Short routing description, or null when not found. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('Load and return'), which is sufficient for this simple retrieval tool. It does not disclose error handling for missing skills, but that is acceptable for a basic tool.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every element serves a clear purpose.
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?
Given the simplicity of a single-parameter retrieval tool, no output schema, and a sibling tool, the description provides sufficient information for an agent to use it correctly. It covers the action, the resource, and the input.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context ('Rails development skill') but no additional meaning beyond the parameter examples given in the schema.
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 uses a specific verb ('Load and return') and identifies the resource ('full SKILL.md instructions') and scope ('Rails development skill'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'list_skills'.
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 implies usage for retrieving a specific skill's instructions but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. 'list_skills' (e.g., 'Use this when you need the full content of a skill; use list_skills to see available skill names').
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!