Skip to main content
Glama

AgentIndex — Agentic Web Index

Server Details

Search 150k+ AI agents and MCP servers. Live liveness probes, behavioral benchmarks, x402 commerce.

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.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

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.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: retrieving a specific agent profile by ID vs. searching agents by keyword. No overlap or confusion possible.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_agent_profile and search_agents. No style mixing.

Tool Count3/5

Only 2 tools, which is minimal but covers the core index operations of search and detail retrieval. However, for the stated purpose of an 'Agentic Web Index', more tools might be expected.

Completeness2/5

Missing obvious operations like listing all agents, creating/updating/deleting profiles, or filtering/pagination. The tool surface is severely limited for the domain.

Available Tools

2 tools
get_agent_profileAInspect

Retrieve a full profile for a specific agent or endpoint by its numeric ID or identifier URI. Returns protocol detection, liveness history, on-chain payment evidence, MCP tools list, and A2A skills.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNumeric ID (e.g. 42) or full identifier URI (e.g. urn:air:huggingface.co:skill:abc)
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions specific return content (protocol detection, liveness history, etc.), implying read-only behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second lists return contents. No unnecessary words, highly scannable.

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?

Single-parameter tool with no output schema; description adequately lists return categories. No missing context for selection and invocation.

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?

Single parameter 'id' with schema coverage 100%. Description redundantly mentions ID type but adds no new semantics beyond schema's detailed example.

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 explicitly states the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'full profile', with specific identifiers (numeric ID or identifier URI). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tool 'search_agents' by focusing on individual profile retrieval.

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?

Indicates usage via numeric ID or URI, providing clear context. Lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, but the sibling name 'search_agents' implies when to use this instead.

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

search_agentsAInspect

Search the AgentIndex for AI agents, MCP servers, A2A agents, and x402-gated APIs by capability keyword. Returns ranked results with type, description, URL, and tags.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoFilter by resource type: application/mcp-server-card+json, application/ai-skill, application/openapi+json, etc.
limitNoMax results (default 10, max 50)
capabilityYesCapability or keyword to search (e.g. trading, data retrieval, mcp)
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations; description states results are ranked but doesn't mention idempotency, auth needs, or side effects. Provides some behavioral insight into output structure.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with key action and result description, no fluff.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema, description adequately explains return fields. Covers all essential aspects for a search tool with 3 parameters.

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 descriptions already do the work. The tool description adds context about searched resources but no new parameter semantics 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?

Clearly states it searches the AgentIndex for specific resource types (AI agents, MCP servers, etc.) by capability keyword, distinguishing it from sibling 'get_agent_profile'.

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?

Implies usage for discovery by keyword, but lacks explicit exclusion or when-not-to-use compared to 'get_agent_profile'.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources