Free AI-visibility and competitive Exposure Audit for any domain. No account, no API key.
Run a free competitive-exposure / AI-visibility audit for a business domain.
No account or API key needed. Pass a bare registrable domain (e.g. "acme.com"), not a full URL. A first-time domain starts a background run and this returns a "started" message — call the tool again with the same domain in about 2-3 minutes to fetch the result. Repeat domains within the cache window return instantly. This is a strictly rate-limited free tool, not a general-purpose research API — see the response text for status and the free-usage cap. A completed result ends with a link to view the same result on dozier.io (and run a free audit there).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses that no account/API key is needed, the background-run behavior, rate limiting, free-usage cap, and that response text contains status and a link to view results. This is thorough and honest about the tool's limitations.
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 dense paragraph covering purpose, input format, async behavior, rate limits, and output link. No sentence is wasted, but it could be slightly more scannable with brief line breaks; still, it is concise and front-loaded with the 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 tool's complexity (async, cache, rate limits) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential usage aspects needed to call it correctly: input constraints, timing for results, repeat behavior, and where to find status/cap info. The output format is left to the schema, which is acceptable.
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 0%, so the description must clarify the parameter. It explicitly states the accepted format ('bare registrable domain... not a full URL') and gives an example ('acme.com'), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's bare 'domain' field.
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 states a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('free competitive-exposure / AI-visibility audit') with a clear scope ('for a business domain'). It immediately distinguishes the tool's function and is not a tautology, earning full marks.
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 input requirements ('bare registrable domain... not a full URL'), asynchronous behavior (first-time returns 'started', repeat after 2-3 minutes to fetch result), and cache semantics. It also mentions rate limits and that it's not a general-purpose API, giving clear exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
run_exposure_auditClaiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such as io.github.acme/server also needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.
HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
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
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
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.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Free SEO, GEO, and AEO audits: analyze any page or domain, AI-crawler access, agent readiness.
Scan any website's AI readiness: AI search visibility and AI agent usability. Free, no auth.
Free AI visibility check: is your business cited when customers ask AI? Score plus competitors.
Free SEO & AI-search (AEO) audits for any site or Shopify store, with emailed weekly score reports.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and unambiguous.
The single tool name follows a clear verb_noun pattern (run_exposure_audit), which is consistent and predictable. No conflicting conventions exist.
With only one tool, the server feels minimal and borderline thin. However, the tool serves a narrow, specific purpose (running an exposure audit), so the count, while low, is not unreasonable for the scope.
The single tool covers the core workflow (start and retrieve an audit) with no obvious dead ends. Minor gaps exist—such as lacking a separate list or history tool—but agents can work around them by re-calling the tool with the same domain.
