Skip to main content
Glama

Openchargemap

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Scan Dependency

scan_dependency
Read-onlyIdempotent

Composite "should I add this npm package to my project" check in ONE call — fans out across deps.dev (license + advisories + version history) and bundlephobia (gzipped/minified bundle size, dependency count, ESM/tree-shake support). Use whenever an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me". Returns a summary block (is_latest, license, published_at, advisory_count, bundle_kb_min, bundle_kb_gz, dependency_count, has_esm, tree_shakeable), per-advisory detail, links, and a list of recent alternative versions. NPM ecosystem only in v1; PyPI / Maven / Cargo / Go fall under deps.dev:version directly. Partial failures degrade gracefully — bundlephobia's first measurement on a new version can take 5-30s; sources_failed will list it if it times out, the rest still returns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packageYesnpm package name. Scoped packages (e.g. "@types/node") are accepted.
versionNoSpecific version to check (e.g., "18.3.1"). Defaults to the latest published version when omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Description adds significant value beyond annotations: composite call fans out across two services, returns specific fields, handles partial failures gracefully (bundlephobia timeout), and lists alternative versions. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Single paragraph of 4-5 sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, then details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

No output schema, but the description thoroughly lists return fields (summary block, per-advisory, links, alternatives) and failure behavior. The tool is complex with two services, but the description covers all essential aspects.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, but it reiterates version default and scoped package acceptance, which is consistent. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's a composite check for evaluating npm packages, with specific verb 'scan' and resource 'dependency'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by its specific use case and composite nature.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me"'. Also clarifies scope limitations (NPM only) and provides alternatives for other ecosystems via deps.dev:version.

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

All Openchargemap toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) are nearly identical; Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, etc.) are hard to distinguish; memory tools (remember, recall, forget) and subscription tools (subscribe, unsubscribe, list_subscriptions, recent_alerts) also create ambiguity.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix snake_case (find_stations, get_station) with inconsistent verbs and noun phrases (ai_visibility_check, entity_profile, validate_claim). No clear pattern emerges, and some names are verbose or unclear (e.g., scan_competitor_ai_presence).

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools, the set is too large for a focused server. Many tools are unrelated to the server name 'Openchargemap' (EV charging), and the collection feels like a grab bag of unrelated functionalities (Pipeworx data, Polymarket betting, AI visibility, memory management).

Completeness2/5

For the implied domain of EV charging, only two tools exist (find_stations, get_station), leaving major gaps (no CRUD). As a general utility, it lacks coverage in many areas (e.g., no file handling, no scheduling). The set is incomplete both as a domain-specific and general-purpose server.

Resources