A
licenseNot graded
qualityA
maintenancePerforms explainable, deterministic static analysis of MCP tool metadata to detect misleading instructions, concealed capabilities, and schema drift without executing tools.
1
MIT
MCP Surface Lint
Server Details
Statically audits MCP tool surfaces for token cost, schema quality, and design issues.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- DLeibner/mcp-surface-lint
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
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.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
A4.7/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 5/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with others. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and unique within the server.
Naming Consistency4/5
The tool name 'check_mcp_server' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent with common MCP naming conventions. Although there is only one tool, the name is descriptive and not inconsistent with any other naming style.
Tool Count3/5
A single tool feels thin for a server dedicated to linting MCP surfaces, but the tool itself is substantial and covers the core functionality. This is borderline; additional utility tools could enhance the server, but the current count is not egregiously low.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers the primary domain of statically auditing MCP tool surfaces, providing scores and findings. Minor gaps exist, such as no configuration options or comparison features, but the core lifecycle for the stated purpose is sufficiently covered.
Available Tools
1 toolcheck_mcp_serverCheck MCP serverARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Statically audit an MCP tool surface from a public HTTPS URL or tools/list snapshot. Returns deterministic scores and findings without invoking any target tool or making LLM calls. When the user asks to check another installed MCP server, read that server's complete tool definitions from client context and pass them as snapshot (MCP name or Cursor-style tool both work; do not use file paths or $ref). If those definitions are unavailable, ask the user for its public endpoint or tools/list JSON instead of inventing an audit.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Public HTTPS Streamable HTTP MCP endpoint to inspect. | |
| headers | No | Optional HTTP headers sent only while reading the remote tools/list response. | |
| snapshot | No | A tools/list JSON response, mcplint snapshot, or client tool dump containing a tools array. Each tool needs `name`, or the Cursor-style `tool` alias. Forward another installed server's complete tool definitions here — do not invent schemas. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| grade | Yes | |
| stats | Yes | |
| scores | Yes | |
| server | Yes | |
| source | Yes | |
| findings | Yes | |
| findingCounts | Yes | |
| staticAnalysis | Yes | |
| targetToolsInvoked | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A5/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses that the tool 'does not invoke any target tool or make LLM calls,' ensures results are deterministic, and limits headers to reading the remote tools/list response. It also warns against using file paths/$ref and instructs reading definitions from client context. These behavioral traits go well beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent) and add meaningful context.
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 about three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then behavior, then input guidance. Each clause provides necessary information without fluff, fitting comfortably in one paragraph.
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?
With an output schema present and no sibling tools, the description covers the tool's inputs, behavior, fallback, and exclusions. The instructions on how to obtain snapshot from client context and ask user for endpoint fully contextualize when and how to invoke this tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema already describes all parameters, and the description adds critical semantics: snapshot can be an MCP `name` or Cursor-style `tool`, should not be file paths/$ref, and should contain a tools array. It clarifies that headers are optional and only used while reading the remote tools/list response. This meaningfully enriches the schema definitions.
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 description opens with 'Statically audit an MCP tool surface' and specifies both input sources (public HTTPS URL or tools/list snapshot) and the scope (deterministic scores and findings). It clearly distinguishes this as a read-only audit tool that never invokes target tools, making the purpose unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly instructs when to pass another installed server's definitions as a snapshot, when to ask the user for a public endpoint or tools/list JSON, and what to avoid (file paths or $ref). It also says 'instead of inventing an audit,' providing clear fallback guidance. This addresses usage and alternatives very well.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$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
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!
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceA stdio MCP server that audits other MCP servers by linting their tool schemas and calling tools with malformed inputs to produce a 0–100 conformance score and Markdown report.6MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceLint agent SKILL.md files and MCP tool schemas to catch issues like missing descriptions, similar skills, unconstrained parameters, and destructive tools without confirmation gates.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP-native auditor for LLM hallucination and grounding issues in RAG systems. Provides prioritized findings in table, JSON, or SARIF format for CI gating and AI agent integration.