Skip to main content
Glama

nupkg nuspec id shape, body discarded

by io.github.sadri-dridi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

nupkg-ok

nupkg nuspec id shape, body discarded

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoGit ref name; discarded after the shape check
urlNoHTTPS URL to normalize or cite
cityNoCity name for a public weather hint; discarded after the call
feedNoPublic RSS or Atom URL; titles discarded
hostNoPublic hostname
jsonNoJSON text to validate; discarded after the check
pathNoFile path to check; no disk access
zoneNoIANA timezone name
queryNoSearch text; discarded after the length check
websiteNoPublic https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / website
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Public https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. The only behavioral hint is 'body discarded', which says content is ignored, but it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what it returns, how it verifies shape, or whether any side effects or network access occur.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The text is short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concisely informative. A two-fragment phrase is not enough for a tool with ten optional parameters and no output schema.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the parameter complexity, lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It leaves unclear the expected input, the diagnostics or return value, and the exact behavior that distinguishes a valid from invalid nuspec ID shape.

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?

Although the schema describes all ten parameters, none of them clearly corresponds to a NuGet/nuspec identifier, and the tool description never explains which parameter should carry the ID. With ten optional unrelated-looking strings, an agent cannot reliably map its intended input to a field.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a domain ('nupkg nuspec id shape') but expresses no verb or concrete outcome, such as 'validates', 'returns whether', or 'checks'. It adds only the vague qualifier 'body discarded' and does not differentiate this tool from sibling shape validators.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool or when to prefer another shape-checking tool such as github-repo-shape, jira-key-shape, or wiki-title-ok. No preconditions, input type, or alternatives are mentioned.

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

All nupkg nuspec id shape, body discarded toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources