auth-token-service
Server Details
Hash passwords with bcrypt and issue/verify JWT session tokens over A2A + MCP.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- mikerawsonnz/gosce-agents
- GitHub Stars
- 1
- Server Listing
- A2A GOSCE Agents
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 3/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool, there is no risk of confusion between tools, so disambiguation is perfect.
A single tool name cannot be inconsistent with others; the naming is trivially consistent.
One tool for multiple distinct operations (hash, issue, verify) feels thin; a few more tools would better scope the server's purpose.
The single tool covers hashing and token management, but lacks separate operations like token revocation or password verification, leaving minor gaps.
Available Tools
1 toolinvokeBInspect
Hash passwords with bcrypt and issue/verify JWT session tokens.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | Yes | JSON request for this capability (the same body you'd send as an A2A message). |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It indicates side effects (password hashing, token creation) but provides no details on authentication requirements, reversibility, or what happens to existing tokens.
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 that front-loads the core functionality. While concise, it could benefit from breaking into multiple sentences or listing the operations.
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?
The tool has no output schema and description does not explain return values. Given the dual functionality (hashing and JWT), the description is incomplete without specifying what the tool returns after each operation.
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 the description adds meaning by clarifying that the 'input' parameter is a JSON request formatted like an A2A message. This helps the agent understand the expected structure.
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 states it hashes passwords with bcrypt and issues/verifies JWT tokens, providing a clear verb and resource. However, it combines multiple actions without specifying which operation will be performed in a single invocation, which slightly reduces clarity.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no sibling tools, but the description lacks context about prerequisites or typical scenarios.
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!
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceMCP server for secure credential management, browser-based login automation, and TOTP/2FA auto-solving. Encrypts credentials with AES-256-GCM and automates login flows via Playwright.Last updated322
- AlicenseAqualityFmaintenanceProvides secure OAuth2-based credential management for MCP servers, allowing agents to obtain short-lived token references without exposing raw secrets.Last updated79MIT
- Flicense-qualityDmaintenanceFast, low-latency MCP server for authentication services, enabling AI agents like LM Studio and Claude Desktop to perform user authentication operations such as sign-in, sign-up, OTP verification, and token management.Last updated
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.