Skip to main content
Glama

mcp-archimedes

by io.github.archimedes-market

check_dependencies

Supply-chain trust check for a list of dependencies. Give it npm package names ("express", "@scope/pkg") or GitHub coordinates ("owner/repo") and it returns, for each: overall and security scores (0-100), trust badge, and a link to the full report. CALL THIS BEFORE INSTALLING PACKAGES, when reviewing a package.json or lockfile, or when recommending a library. A low security score or missing license is grounds to warn the user. Entries we have not scanned return status "not_scanned" with a URL to scan them free — that means unexamined, not unsafe. Max 30 entries per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packagesYesnpm package names and/or GitHub "owner/repo" strings.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It transparently explains the 'not_scanned' status and clarifies it means unexamined, not unsafe. It also mentions the max 30 entries limit. While it doesn't disclose auth or rate limits, the read-only nature is implied.

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 concise, well-structured, and front-loaded. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating purpose, input format, output, usage guidance, and clarification of edge case. No superfluous content.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description adequately explains the return values (scores, badge, link) and handles the 'not_scanned' edge case. With only one parameter and simple input, the description is complete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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% with a clear description for the 'packages' parameter. The description adds value by specifying the allowed string formats (npm package names and GitHub coordinates) and reinforcing the max 30 constraint, which goes beyond the schema.

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 it performs a supply-chain trust check for dependencies, specifies the input types (npm packages or GitHub coordinates), and describes the output (scores, badge, link). This differentiates it from sibling tools like check_repo_trust which likely handles single repositories.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is given: 'CALL THIS BEFORE INSTALLING PACKAGES' and lists concrete scenarios (reviewing package.json, lockfile, recommending library). It also explains the 'not_scanned' status and when to warn. While no explicit when-not-to-use is stated, the guidance is strong.

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

All mcp-archimedes 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
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: check_dependencies for batch dependency trust, check_repo_trust for detailed single-repo trust, search_trust_reports for discovering trusted repos, search_bounties for finding bounties, get_bounty_details for bounty specifics, and get_platform_stats for aggregate metrics. No overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (check_dependencies, check_repo_trust, get_bounty_details, get_platform_stats, search_bounties, search_trust_reports). The pattern is predictable and unambiguous.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for the server's dual focus on trust checking (3 tools) and bounty marketplace (2 tools), plus one for platform stats. Each tool earns its place without overwhelming the agent.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core workflows: batch and single-repo trust checks with search capability, bounty discovery and details, and platform stats. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to initiate a scan for unscanned entries, but the descriptions provide URLs for that, so agents can work around it.

Resources