Skip to main content
Glama

devstack-mcp

by io.github.IsaiahDupree

Get one package on one registry (with reverse-dep counts)

get_ecosystems_package
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full normalized metadata for one package on one of 50+ registries, via ecosyste.ms — including the fields v1 registries can't give you: dependentReposCount and dependentPackagesCount (reverse dependencies), ecosystem, and vulnerabilityCount. Scoped/namespaced names are handled automatically. Returns 404 if the package does not exist on that ecosystem.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesPackage name / id.
ecosystemYesTarget ecosyste.ms ecosystem slug (e.g. npm, pypi, cargo, rubygems).

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: scoped/namespaced names are handled automatically, and a 404 is returned for missing packages, which goes beyond 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every phrase adds value. No redundant information or excessive length.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-package getter with no output schema, it covers the key return fields, the source service, and error behavior. It doesn't describe the exact JSON format, but this is not critical for a simple read operation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds extra meaning to the 'name' parameter by clarifying that scoped/namespaced names are handled automatically, reducing ambiguity about how to pass them.

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 retrieves full normalized metadata for one package on one of 50+ registries via ecosyste.ms. It highlights unique fields like dependentReposCount and dependentPackagesCount, distinguishing it from basic v1 registry retrieval tools.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use this tool (when you need ecosyste.ms metadata, reverse-dependency counts, etc.) and implicitly contrasts with v1 registries. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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

All devstack-mcp 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but get_package and get_ecosystems_package both return package metadata and could be confused; search_ecosystems and search_packages also share a similar naming pattern though their behavior differs (exact cross-registry lookup vs fuzzy within a registry). Overall, descriptions help disambiguate.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_ for fetching specific data, search_ for searching. No mixed conventions or vague verbs, making the API predictable.

Tool Count5/5

10 tools is well-scoped for a package/dependency intelligence server. Each tool covers a distinct aspect (metadata, versions, dependencies, downloads, vulnerabilities, insights, search) without feeling bloated or thin.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers core package lookups, version listing, dependency graphs, download stats, vulnerabilities (single and batch), and security insights. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct tool for comparing packages or listing maintainer info, but these are not essential for the stated purpose.

Resources