cyanheads-mcp-server
Server Details
Fleet discovery for the cyanheads MCP ecosystem — semantic search + install snippets.
- 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 4.9/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
Each tool has a distinct, non-overlapping purpose: cyanheads_search retrieves matches for queries, while cyanheads_describe provides detailed info for a named item. There is no ambiguity.
Both tools follow the same prefix 'cyanheads_' followed by a clear verb (_search, _describe). The naming pattern is consistent and predictable.
With only 2 tools, the server feels minimal but still covers its core function (find and describe). However, additional tools like listing all servers or tools could enhance the scope without overloading.
The pair covers the essential discovery workflow: search to find valid names, then describe to get details. A minor gap is the lack of a direct listing endpoint, but the search serves as a reasonable entry point.
Available Tools
2 toolscyanheads_describeDescribe Fleet Tool or ServerARead-onlyInspect
Return the description, connection URL, and per-client install snippets for a named tool or server. For tools: the description and the server it belongs to. For servers: connection URL and install snippets for every supported client (or one specific client when the client parameter is specified). Call cyanheads_search first to find valid names.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | No | Whether name refers to a tool or server. Omit to auto-detect: names containing underscores are treated as tools; names containing hyphens are treated as servers. | |
| name | Yes | Tool name (snake_case, e.g. "earthquake_search") or server name (kebab-case, e.g. "earthquake-mcp-server"). Use cyanheads_search to discover valid names. | |
| client | No | Return the install snippet for this specific client only. Omit to return snippets for all supported clients. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes | The resolved entry — either a tool detail or a server detail depending on the resolved kind. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds detailed behavioral context beyond annotations: explains output for tools vs servers, optional client filtering, and auto-detection logic. Consistent with readOnlyHint=true (read-only) and openWorldHint=false.
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?
Three concise sentences: first states main function, second clarifies differences, third gives usage advice. No redundant information, front-loaded with core purpose.
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?
Complete for a tool with output schema: explains all behaviors (tool vs server, client filtering, auto-detection) and prerequisites. Output schema handles return structure details.
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%, and description adds meaning by explaining behavior based on 'kind' (auto-detection rule) and 'client' (return specific snippet). This goes beyond the schema's property descriptions.
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 returns description, connection URL, and install snippets for a named tool or server, differentiating between tools and servers. It also distinguishes from sibling cyanheads_search by implying this is used after search.
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 instructs to call cyanheads_search first to find valid names, and explains auto-detection of kind based on name format. This provides 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.
cyanheads_searchSearch Fleet Tools and ServersARead-onlyInspect
Search fleet tools and servers by natural-language description. Returns ranked matches with brief summaries and the server each tool belongs to. Use scope "servers" to find which server handles a workflow; use the default scope "tools" to find specific tools. Call cyanheads_describe on a result name to get install snippets and the connection URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results to return (1-20). Default 5. | |
| query | Yes | Natural language search query. Describe what you want to accomplish, a workflow, or a capability area. | |
| scope | No | What to search. "tools" returns individual tool matches; "servers" returns server-level matches. | tools |
| category | No | Filter by catalog category. Omit to search all categories. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | The query that was searched. |
| scope | Yes | Scope that was searched. |
| results | Yes | Ranked matches, best first. |
| totalMatched | Yes | Total relevant matches before the limit was applied. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states the tool returns ranked results with summaries, which aligns with readOnlyHint=true. It adds behavioral context (ranking, summaries, server info) beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction: annotations confirm read-only nature, description reinforces it.
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, front-loaded with the main action, and includes essential usage guidance without superfluous words. Every sentence 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 the complexity (4 parameters, 1 required, enum scope and category, output schema exists), the description covers the main use case, provides scope guidance, and directs to the sibling tool for further details. No gaps remain.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions. The description adds some context (e.g., scope usage hints) but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 tool searches fleet tools and servers by natural language, returns ranked matches with summaries and server association, and distinguishes from the sibling tool cyanheads_describe. The verb 'search' and resource 'fleet tools and servers' are specific and unambiguous.
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 guidance: 'Use scope "servers" to find which server handles a workflow; use the default scope "tools" to find specific tools.' It also instructs the next step: 'Call cyanheads_describe on a result name to get install snippets...', offering a clear usage pathway and alternative.
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!