Skip to main content
Glama

Twitch

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.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral details like partial failures, bundlephobia timing (5-30s), and sources_failed list, providing context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and usage, then details limitations. It is longer but every sentence is informative. Minor conciseness could be achieved by merging some points, but overall it is well-structured.

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?

Given the tool has two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return structure (summary block, per-advisory details, links, alternatives) and partial failure behavior. It is fully adequate for the complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting that scoped packages (e.g., '@types/node') are accepted, which is not in the schema. However, it does not add significant syntax details beyond what the schema provides.

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 defines the tool as a composite check for npm packages using deps.dev and bundlephobia, answering questions about safety, popularity, and size. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from any sibling tools.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use: 'Use whenever an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me".' It also notes the NPM-only limitation and directs to an alternative for other ecosystems.

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

All Twitch 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set includes many similar Pipeworx query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, ask_pipeworx_beta, deep_research) that all serve overlapping purposes, causing confusion. The Twitch-specific tools are distinct but are buried among many unrelated tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case (e.g., get_streams, ask_pipeworx), but there is variation in patterns: some are verb_ noun (get_streams), some are just verbs (remember), and some are adjective_noun (recent_changes). No strong pattern across the whole set.

Tool Count2/5

With 35 tools, the server is bloated for its stated purpose as a 'Twitch' server. Only about 4-5 tools are Twitch-related; the rest are from a data platform (Pipeworx) and generic utilities, making the count feel excessive and unfocused.

Completeness2/5

For a Twitch server, the tool surface is severely incomplete. It lacks essential Twitch features like clips, follows, chat, or channel management. The few Twitch tools present cover only basic stream and user lookup.

Resources