PackageGuard
Server Details
x402-gated safety checker for npm/PyPI packages before you npm install / pip install.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolcheck_package_safetyBInspect
Check whether an npm or PyPI package is safe to install. Costs $0.005 USDC via x402 per call.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Exact package name to check for safety before installing | |
| ecosystem | Yes | Package ecosystem to check |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the cost mechanism, which is valuable, but does not disclose what happens when a package is unsafe (e.g., return type, possible errors) or any side effects. The core behavior is stated, but depth is lacking.
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 sentence with 18 words, highly concise. It front-loads the core purpose and adds the cost detail efficiently. However, it could benefit from slight restructuring for clarity (e.g., separating cost info).
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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no siblings), the description covers the essential purpose and cost but fails to describe the return value or possible outputs. With no output schema, the agent would benefit from knowing the response format. The description is functionally complete for a basic check but leaves an important gap.
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 100%: both 'name' and 'ecosystem' have descriptions. The tool description only adds cost context, not parameter details, so it does not meaningfully augment the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description states exactly what the tool does: 'Check whether an npm or PyPI package is safe to install.' The verb 'check' and resource 'package safety' are specific, and the ecosystems npm and PyPI are clearly mentioned. No siblings exist, so differentiation is not needed.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. It only mentions a cost of $0.005 USDC via x402 per call, which is a constraint but not usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$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
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.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
check-package: block malicious npm/PyPI deps before your AI agent installs them. Free, no key.
Detect malicious or vulnerable npm packages: registry search, OSV.dev and GitHub advisory lookups
Pay-per-call DNS/TLS truth and npm/PyPI breakage checks via x402. No account or API key.
Audit GitHub repos for malicious and supply-chain code before you depend on them.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAudits npm packages for supply-chain attacks (typosquatting, malicious install scripts, credential exfiltration) before installation, returning a SAFE/SUSPICIOUS/DANGEROUS verdict.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenancePre-install risk gate for npm packages. Stops AI coding agents from running malicious or lifecycle scripts run.12MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAudits your package-lock.json for supply-chain attacks before install. Cross-checks every resolved entry against the live npm registry to detect integrity mismatches, new install scripts, and other malicious signals.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents and CI to vet npm dependencies before they reach the lockfile, flagging hallucinated, slopsquatted, or otherwise risky packages with evidence-backed verdicts.201MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The single tool's purpose is clear and distinct.
With only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained. The tool name follows a clear verb_noun pattern and is descriptive.
A single tool is borderline for the server's purpose. While it may be sufficient for a very narrow focus, it feels thin compared to typical MCP servers.
The tool covers the core functionality of checking package safety for npm and PyPI. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no support for other ecosystems or additional actions), but agents can work with what's provided.