Skip to main content
Glama

Unphurl

by io.github.123Ergo

resend_verification

Idempotent

Resend the email verification link for an existing Unphurl account.

Use this when a user signed up but their verification link expired (links are valid for 24 hours) and they need a new one. The user's API key won't work until their email is verified.

For security, the response is always the same regardless of whether the email exists, is already verified, or was rate limited. This prevents account enumeration.

Rate limited to 3 requests per email per hour.

This tool does not require an API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesEmail address of the account that needs verification

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing critical behavioral traits: the response is always identical regardless of email existence/status to prevent account enumeration, and there is a rate limit of 3 per email per hour. Also states that no API key is required, which is not present in the annotations.

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 is compact yet complete. It front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, then uses short paragraphs for usage context, security behavior, rate limiting, and authentication. Every sentence adds unique value without redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential context: what it does, when to use it, security considerations, rate limits, and authentication requirements. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by explicitly noting the uniform response.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter 'email' already has a clear description matching the tool's purpose. The tool description does not add new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 first sentence clearly states the action: "Resend the email verification link for an existing Unphurl account." This uses a specific verb (resend) and identifies the exact resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like signup or create_profile.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: "Use this when a user signed up but their verification link expired... and they need a new one." It also notes the consequence of unverified email (API key won't work), which reinforces the use case. Does not explicitly mention alternatives, but none exist among siblings, so it is sufficient.

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

All Unphurl toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: check_url vs check_urls distinguish single vs batch, allowlist CRUD tools are separated, and profile management is distinct from account billing. Minor overlap exists between get_balance and get_stats (both report balance) and between list_profiles and show_defaults (both relate to scoring configuration), but descriptions clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_url, create_profile, list_allowlist, get_balance). A few outliers like purchase and signup are single verbs, but they are standard and do not break the overall predictability.

Tool Count4/5

18 tools is above the ideal 3-15 range but appropriate for the server's broad scope: URL analysis, custom scoring profiles, allowlist management, account billing, and reporting. Each tool serves a distinct function and none feel redundant or superfluous.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core domain thoroughly: single and batch URL checks, credit estimation, profile CRUD (create, list, delete, show defaults), allowlist CRUD, history, and account management (signup, balance, pricing, purchase). Minor gaps exist, such as no delete history or direct retrieval of a single past check by ID, but these are not critical.

Resources