Skip to main content
Glama

tech-stack-detector

by io.github.DataLeadsPRO
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Server Details

Detect the technology stack behind any website: frameworks, CMS, analytics, and more from one POST.

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 · MCP 2025-11-25
URL
Repository
DataLeadsPRO/tech-stack-detector
GitHub Stars
0
Server Listing
tech-stack-detector

TDQS

D1.1/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation1/5

With only one tool there is no inter-tool confusion, but the tool's purpose is entirely opaque ('V1 Tech' gives no indication of what it does). An agent cannot tell what this tool is for, let alone whether it is the right one.

Naming Consistency1/5

The single tool name 'tech' is vague and does not follow any recognizable verb_noun or domain-specific pattern. There is no consistent convention to evaluate, and the name provides almost no semantic signal.

Tool Count1/5

A single tool with a meaningless name and description is the extreme mismatch case. For a 'tech-stack-detector' server, at least one clearly-described detection operation would be expected, but this surface is effectively empty.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete and impossible to assess because the domain and functionality are undefined. There is one tool that appears to be a placeholder, providing no usable capabilities.

Available Tools

1 tool
techDInspect

V1 Tech

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo
maxTimeoutNo

TDQS

D1.1/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'V1 Tech' reveals nothing about side effects, required permissions, or expected outcomes. For a tool with two parameters, this is a complete gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief, but brevity here is under-specification rather than conciseness. 'V1 Tech' provides no content that could be front-loaded; it is essentially a placeholder. This does not meet the standard of an appropriately sized description.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With two parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a two-word description, this tool is entirely inadequate for an agent to understand its purpose, invoke it correctly, or interpret results. Complete information is missing on every dimension.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the parameters 'url' or 'maxTimeout' at all. The agent is left without any hint of what these fields mean or how they affect behavior.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'V1 Tech' is a version label, not a statement of what the tool does. It lacks a verb, resource, or any functional indication. This is even less informative than a vague purpose; it is essentially missing entirely.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool or any alternatives. With no siblings and no purpose described, an agent has no basis for selecting it over anything else.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool update
    • First observedtech

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • technographics

    pipeworx-io
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Enables detecting what a website is built with—such as ecommerce platforms, CMSs, JS frameworks, analytics, and CDNs—by reading the page itself, returning evidence for each detection and listing detection coverage.
    MIT

  • Forency

    cheevahagadog
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Investigate any website's technology stack: CMS, eCommerce, frameworks, analytics, CRM, payments, and hosting behind any URL.
    3
    21 npm
    1
    MIT
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources