Skip to main content
Glama

search

by io.github.aimnis

register

Get your user a free Aimnis API key (no credit card, takes one call).

Ask your user for their email address first. The key comes back in this tool
result — relay it to the user so they can save it and add it to your MCP
connection ('Authorization: Bearer aim_...'). A key raises the daily
live-search limits; cached answers are always free, with or without a key.
Re-registering with the same email rotates (replaces) that email's key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesYour USER'S email address — ask them for it first, never invent or guess one. The key is returned in this result and a copy is emailed to this address.
use_caseNoOptional one-line note on what the key will be used for.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses that the tool is a write operation (creating/rotating keys), the key is returned in the result and emailed, and re-registering replaces the key. Annotations already indicate non-readOnly, so description adds valuable context about user permission and key handling without contradiction.

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?

Description is well-structured and front-loaded with the key purpose. It includes necessary details but could be slightly more concise; however, every sentence adds value.

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 the simple tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the result format, key usage, and limits, leaving no ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for both parameters. The tool description reiterates the need for the user's own email and the optional use_case, but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states the tool obtains a free Aimnis API key for the user, specifying no credit card needed and one call. The verb 'get' and resource 'Aimnis API key' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools 'search' and 'stats' which serve different purposes.

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?

Explicitly instructs to ask user for their email first, warns against guessing, and explains what to do with the resulting key. Also notes re-registration behavior, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All search 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: register for API key, search for queries, stats for cache metrics. No overlap.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names are single, lowercase words, but they mix verb (register, search) and noun (stats). Consistent style but not a strict pattern.

Tool Count4/5

Three tools is minimal but reasonable for a search server covering key management, search, and stats. Could benefit from one or two more.

Completeness4/5

Covers core operations: registration, search, and metrics. Missing cache management or detailed entry inspection, but sufficient for basic use.

Resources