Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Merchant verification for AI shopping agents.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL
Repository
warwickwood-cell/gengeo-agent-registry
GitHub Stars
2
Server Listing
GenGEO

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 DescriptionsB

Average 3.3/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The agent will always select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool 'verify_store' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent and unambiguous.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool is borderline for a server named 'Agent Registry'. While it may be sufficient if the only purpose is verification, the name implies a broader scope, making the count feel thin.

Completeness1/5

The server is severely incomplete for a registry; it lacks tools for creating, updating, deleting, or listing agents or records, limiting its usefulness to a single verification operation.

Available Tools

1 tool
verify_storeVerify StoreBInspect

Verify whether a merchant has an active GenGEO verification record. Results should be treated as one signal within a broader agent decision framework.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYes
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. It implies a read-only check but does not explicitly state that it does not modify state, nor does it disclose error behavior or data freshness. Adequate but not thorough.

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 two sentences long, directly stating the purpose and providing an interpretive caveat. No unnecessary words; efficient and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal. It omits parameter explanation and behavioral traits, leaving the agent partially informed.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The single parameter 'domain' has no schema description (0% coverage), and the description does not add any clarifications about its format, constraints, or semantics. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema details.

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 verifies whether a merchant has an active GenGEO verification record. It uses a specific verb ('verify') and resource ('store/merchant GenGEO record'), avoiding tautology.

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 advises treating results as one signal in a broader decision framework, providing some usage context. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention any alternatives (though none exist).

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.