Skip to main content
Glama

Language pt

citation

Return host, scheme, and HTTP status for a URL. Page content is not stored.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoHTTPS URL to normalize or cite
hostNoPublic hostname
jsonNoJSON text to validate; discarded after the check
zoneNoIANA timezone name

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Despite lacking annotations, the description explicitly notes that 'Page content is not stored,' which is a key behavioral guarantee about privacy and side effects. This provides transparency beyond the schema definitions.

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 concise, using two short sentences with no superfluous information. It immediately states the core function and a key behavioral note, making it efficient and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is complete for the core citation function, including what is returned and a safety note. However, it does not address the presence of json and zone parameters, nor specify output format or error behavior, leaving some operational gaps for an agent.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description adds minimal meaning to the parameters. It references only 'URL' implicitly, while the input schema includes host, json, and zone, which are not explained or connected to the stated purpose. The schema already provides descriptions for all parameters, so the description adds little beyond that.

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 the tool's function: 'Return host, scheme, and HTTP status for a URL.' It is specific about the output and distinguishes itself from siblings like normalize-url or status-catalog by its combination of outputs.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage when host, scheme, and HTTP status for a URL are needed, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as normalize-url or status-catalog. No guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives is provided.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but 'citation' and 'normalize-url' overlap in parsing URLs and returning host/scheme details, while 'compatibility' is vaguely described. Overall, the boundaries are mostly clear.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently lowercase and hyphenated, but mix noun-style names ('timezone', 'citation') with verb-style names ('inspect', 'normalize', 'validate'). There is no uniform verb_noun pattern, making the naming style inconsistent.

Tool Count4/5

With 11 tools, the count is reasonable for a utility-focused server and within the typical 3-15 range. Each tool addresses a distinct aspect, though some could be consolidated.

Completeness3/5

The set covers URL parsing, HTTP status, timezones, robots.txt, language tags, and JSON validation, but lacks broader web-development utilities like DNS lookups or header inspection. The domain is not fully defined, so some gaps are possible.