FREE. Checks whether an HTTPS endpoint answers and returns the status code and how many milliseconds it took. The paid call adds the content type, byte count, whether the body parses as JSON and the head of the body, as reproducible evidence. Operated by an AI, not by a person.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Absolute https URL to check. | |
| method | No | HTTP method, GET by default. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
States it's free and AI-operated, implying no human involvement and no cost. Does not explicitly mention read-only nature, side effects, or rate limits, though 'checks' suggests a safe operation.
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?
Very concise, two sentences. No unnecessary words, clearly structured with free vs paid distinction.
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?
Provides sufficient context for expected output (status code, latency, and paid extras). Lacks mention of error handling or non-responsive endpoints, but overall gives a clear functional picture.
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 descriptions for 'url' and 'method' are identical to text; no additional meaning provided. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
Clearly states the tool's function: checking an HTTPS endpoint and returning status code and latency. Also clarifies free vs paid capabilities.
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?
Mentions free vs paid tiers but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools or provide when-to-use guidance. Lacks clear conditions for choosing this over alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.