A
licenseA
qualityB
maintenanceA 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.
6
MIT
MCP Surface Lint
Server Details
Statically audits MCP tool surfaces for token cost, schema quality, and design issues.
- 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
A4.6/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 4.8/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion with other tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined in its description.
Naming Consistency5/5
The single tool name 'check_mcp_server' follows a clear verb_noun pattern and is self-descriptive. There are no other tools to compare against, so consistency is inherently maintained.
Tool Count3/5
The server has only one tool, which feels thin for a typical MCP server. However, the tool's narrow purpose (auditing MCP surfaces) may justify a minimal surface, but it is still borderline.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers both remote URLs and local snapshots, returning scores and findings without external calls. Minor gaps exist, such as potential support for private endpoints or local files, but the core audit workflow is 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, forward that server's complete tool definitions from client context as snapshot. 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 or mcplint snapshot containing a tools array. |
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
A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the annotations, the description adds crucial behavioral details: it 'returns deterministic scores and findings without invoking any target tool or making LLM calls.' This explains the static, non-invasive nature of the audit. It also instructs the agent to ask the user rather than inventing an audit, a strong anti-hallucination safeguard. These add substantial value beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no redundant content. The first sentence is a concise summary; the second is longer and contains a conditional workflow, but each clause is necessary. While the second sentence could be split for readability, it remains tightly written and front-loaded with the core purpose.
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?
Given that an output schema exists and the annotations are rich, the description fully covers the essential context: the tool's purpose, input modes, non-invocation guarantee, and an explicit fallback behavior when definitions are unavailable. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without ambiguity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, but the description clarifies the relationship between the parameters: 'from a public HTTPS URL or tools/list snapshot.' This explicitly frames url and snapshot as alternative inputs, which is not directly stated in the schema's individual parameter descriptions. The description also implies that headers are used only in the URL mode, reinforcing schema semantics.
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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Statically audit an MCP tool surface from a public HTTPS URL or tools/list snapshot.' It uses a specific verb ('audit') and resource ('MCP tool surface'), and notes it returns 'deterministic scores and findings.' This unambiguously distinguishes what the tool does, even without siblings.
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 how to handle a common request pattern: 'When the user asks to check another installed MCP server, forward that server's complete tool definitions from client context as snapshot. If those definitions are unavailable, ask the user for its public endpoint or tools/list JSON instead of inventing an audit.' This is concrete, actionable guidance that goes beyond a simple purpose statement.
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!
Related MCP Servers
- Flicense-qualityBmaintenanceMCP-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.
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAudits MCP tool descriptions for quality and reliability, scoring them 0-100, detecting smells, and providing rewritten versions for better agent accuracy.4MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceA stdio MCP server that audits other MCP servers over the live protocol. It connects to any MCP target (stdio or HTTP), lints every tool's schema for agent-usability, then actually calls the tools with deliberately broken inputs to see how the server handles them, and returns a 0–100 conformance score with a per-dimension breakdown rendered as Markdown.66MIT