Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Google-OAuth-gated LLM gateway: verify a Google ID token, then run a Gemini (Vertex AI) completion f

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 4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceC
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined.

Naming Consistency4/5

With a single tool, naming consistency is not an issue. The verb 'invoke' is clear but could be more descriptive (e.g., 'invoke_llm'), so it's not a perfect 5.

Tool Count1/5

A single tool is extremely limited for a server that claims to be a multi-LLM agent. Essential operations like listing models, managing contexts, or handling different authentication flows are missing, making the tool count severely inadequate.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is critically incomplete. The server only provides one invocation endpoint, lacking any model management, configuration, history, or multi-LLM orchestration. The name 'multi-llm' is misleading.

Available Tools

1 tool
invokeAInspect

Google-OAuth-gated LLM gateway: verify a Google ID token, then run a Gemini (Vertex AI) completion for the verified caller.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYesJSON request for this capability (the same body you'd send as an A2A message).
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions OAuth verification and gateway behavior, but lacks details on failure modes, rate limits, or response format. For a verification and generation tool, additional transparency would improve trust.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and core behavior with no wasted words. It is well front-loaded.

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 the tool has one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: OAuth gating and Gemini completion. It does not explain the output or error handling, but for a simple tool, it is reasonably complete.

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% with a single 'input' parameter. The description adds context that the input is a JSON request like an A2A message, but does not elaborate on structure or constraints. This adds marginal value beyond the schema description.

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 it is a Google-OAuth-gated LLM gateway that verifies a Google ID token and runs a Gemini completion. It specifies the verb (verify, run) and resource (Gemini/Vertex AI) with sufficient detail. No sibling tools exist, so no differentiation needed.

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?

The description implies the tool is for authenticated callers using Google OAuth tokens and that it performs a completion. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, with no sibling tools, the guidance is effective.

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