Skip to main content
Glama

FreeToolHub

by io.github.cavan1977
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

generate_mcp_server_card

Generate a SEP-1649 MCP Server Card (/.well-known/mcp/server-card.json) so crawlers and registries can discover your server without connecting to it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesServer name
toolsNoOptional JSON array of {name, description} for the capability summary. Accepts a JSON array, or a JSON string containing one.
versionNoServer version (semver)
transportNoTransport: streamable-http or sse (default streamable-http)
descriptionYesWhat the server does
endpointUrlNoPublic Streamable HTTP endpoint URL
requiresAuthNoDoes the server require authentication?

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / tools / description
      Previous value: -"Optional JSON array of {name, description} for the capability summary"New value: +"Optional JSON array of {name, description} for the capability summary. Accepts a JSON array, or a JSON string containing one."
    • changedInput schema / properties / tools / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "array",
+  "object"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the purpose (discovery without connection) but not any side effects, such as whether it overwrites an existing file, requires network access, or validates inputs. There is no mention of the output format or any constraints on the generated JSON. This is thin for a generation tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero fluff. It states the action, the artifact, and the rationale efficiently, which is ideal for quick agent scanning.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 7 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is underspecified. It does not explain the structure of the generated card (SEP-1649 standard), how the 'tools' parameter affects the summary, or any validation behavior. An agent would need to inspect the schema and possibly the standard to call it correctly. The presence of a sibling validate_mcp_server_card suggests a related workflow, but that is not mentioned.

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%, so all 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain how 'tools' should be structured or how 'transport' interacts with 'endpointUrl', but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the complete schema coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Generate'), a concrete resource ('SEP-1649 MCP Server Card' at a well-known path), and the purpose ('so crawlers and registries can discover your server'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like validate_mcp_server_card and generate_mcp_client_config by focusing on the server-card artifact.

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 description implies when to use it (when you want your server discoverable) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state exclusions. There is no mention of validate_mcp_server_card for post-generation validation or generate_mcp_client_config for client-side config, so an agent must infer the context.

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

All FreeToolHub 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