benmilne
Server Details
Search and read essays by Ben Milne on payments, stablecoins, and company building.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.5/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_post retrieves a single post by ID or slug, list_posts allows browsing and filtering by category or tag, and search_posts handles keyword-based searches. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_post, list_posts, search_posts) using lowercase with underscores. The naming is predictable and intuitive for both agents and developers.
With three tools, the server is well-scoped for a blog post retrieval API. It covers the essential operations (get one, list many, search) without being too minimal or overly extensive, earning its place.
The tool set provides full read-only coverage for a blog: retrieval by ID/slug, filtered browsing, and keyword search. Within its intended domain of serving published posts, there are no obvious gaps or dead ends for common user queries.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_postARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Retrieve a single post by numeric ID or slug, or pass id=0 for The Value Layer book metadata. Returns title, date, author, content_html, categories, and tags. Use slug from search_posts or list_posts results to chain calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Numeric post ID, or 0 for The Value Layer book metadata | |
| slug | No | Post slug (alternative to id, e.g. 'rate-of-change') |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds return fields (title, date, author, etc.) and special id=0 behavior, supplementing annotations well.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundancy. Every part adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given simple tool with two optional params and no output schema, description fully explains purpose, parameters, return fields, and chaining usage. Complete for effective use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema covers both parameters with descriptions; description adds concrete example for slug and clarifies id=0 meaning, going beyond schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states it retrieves a single post by numeric ID or slug, plus the special id=0 case for book metadata. Distinguishes from sibling tools by referencing slug from search_posts/list_posts.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly recommends using slug from search_posts or list_posts results to chain calls, providing clear usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_postsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Browse, filter, and paginate all published posts. Returns summaries with title, date, URL, and excerpt. Optionally filter by category or tag slug. Use when a user wants to browse topics, see recent essays, or find posts in a specific category (company-building, payment-systems, stablecoin-infrastructure, financial-regulation) or tag.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag | No | Filter by tag slug for cross-cutting themes | |
| page | No | Page number for pagination | |
| category | No | Filter by category slug (e.g. company-building, payment-systems) | |
| per_page | No | Results per page |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that it returns summaries with specific fields and optionally filters, which is consistent and provides useful context beyond the structured annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with additional context, front-loaded with the action and return. It is efficient but includes a list of example category slugs which adds length. Still, it is well-structured and clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema, the description explains return fields (title, date, URL, excerpt). It covers filtering and pagination. Missing hints about sorting/ordering, but overall provides adequate context for a browse tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the filter parameters (tag/category slugs) and gives example category values, which helps the agent understand usage beyond the schema description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it lists published posts with filtering and pagination, and specifies what is returned (summaries with title, date, URL, excerpt). It implies a browsing use case but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_post or search_posts beyond context.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit usage scenarios: browsing topics, seeing recent essays, or finding posts by category/tag. It lists specific category slugs. However, it does not mention when not to use or explicitly compare to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_postsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Search all published posts by keyword or phrase. Use when a user asks about a specific topic like stablecoin infrastructure, payment regulation, or company building. Returns matching posts ranked by relevance with title, date, URL, and excerpt.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query string |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating that posts are 'ranked by relevance' and 'returns title, date, URL, and excerpt', which is behavioral info 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (1 required parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage context, and return format adequately. No missing information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a single 'query' parameter. The description adds that it searches by 'keyword or phrase', providing additional context beyond the schema's 'Search query string'.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'search', the resource 'all published posts', and the action 'by keyword or phrase'. It also provides examples of topics, making it easy for the agent to understand the tool's purpose. It is distinct from sibling tools 'get_post' and 'list_posts'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Use when a user asks about a specific topic...' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling tools are listed, allowing inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!