Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

IA-QA — 152 QA & Dev Tools for AI Agents

by io.github.JcJamet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

mcp_schema_lint

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lint one MCP tool definition with the same rules as mcp_server_health_check: errors break the MCP spec (FAIL), documentation_issues are what its strict mode refuses — a parameter without description or type (FIX, never an A) — and suggestions are style only (snake_case) and change nothing.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tool_definitionYesMCP tool definition object with name, description, inputSchema

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gradeNo
errorsNo
warningsNo
error_countNo
quality_scoreNo
warning_countNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "tool_definition": {
+      "description": "Return the current weather for a city. Use it when the user asks about the weather now.",
+      "inputSchema": {
+        "properties": {
+          "city": {
+            "description": "City name, e.g. Paris",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "city"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "name": "get_weather"
+    }
+  }
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties
      Added value: +{
+  "error_count": {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "errors": {},
+  "grade": {},
+  "quality_score": {},
+  "warning_count": {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "warnings": {}
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / tool_definition / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description's value is in explaining the severity taxonomy: errors break the spec, documentation_issues are FIX-level and never an A, suggestions are style-only and change nothing. That tells the agent how to interpret the result, which is real added context beyond 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?

A single dense sentence with no wasted preamble, and the core action ('lint one MCP tool definition') is front-loaded. The em-dash nesting of the three severity levels is slightly hard to parse but every clause carries information.

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 annotations covering the safety profile, the description only needs to explain the severity semantics — which it does for all three levels. Nothing essential for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and there is a single required parameter, so the schema already documents tool_definition. The description adds nothing about the parameter itself (e.g. that it must be an object with name/description/inputSchema), leaving that to the schema's example.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (lint) and resource (one MCP tool definition), which cleanly separates it from the server-wide mcp_server_health_check named in the text. The scope word 'one' is the key differentiator, though it is embedded in a clause about rules rather than stated as its own contrast.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The reference to mcp_server_health_check implies the split (one definition vs a whole server), but the description never says explicitly 'use this for a single tool, use that for a server.' The agent must infer the selection rule from 'one ... with the same rules as'.

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

All IA-QA — 152 QA & Dev Tools for AI Agents toolsInspect
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