Server Details
Reddit posts, comments, subreddits, and search for AI agents. No key needed to start.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
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.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.8/5 across 7 of 7 tools scored.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: account usage, post content, subreddit info, subreddit posts, user profile, URL resolution, and search. No overlapping functionality that could cause confusion.
Six of seven tools follow the 'reddit_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., reddit_get_post, reddit_search). However, get_usage deviates by lacking the prefix, making it slightly inconsistent.
Seven tools cover the essential operations for a read-only Reddit interface without being excessive or insufficient. Each tool earns its place for the domain.
The tool set covers discovery (search, URL resolve), reading posts/comments/users/subreddits, and account usage. Minor missing features like trending feeds or writing capabilities are outside the intended scope, but for a read-only server it is nearly complete.
Available Tools
7 toolsget_usageCheck credits and recent chargesARead-onlyInspect
Check your balance, plan, limits, and the last 10 charges (receipt ids included). Costs 0 credits and is exempt from the per-minute rate limit, so call it whenever you need to budget. The response includes upgrade_url (give it to your human when credits or plan limits block you; purchases credit this account directly with no login) and manage_url (give it to your human to change or cancel a paid plan in the Stripe billing portal). Trial accounts also get a claim_url that attaches an email so the account can be recovered if the key is lost. Requires an API key: keyless calls have no account, and each keyless response already reports its cost in the usage block. Not for fetching platform data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint), description reveals it costs 0 credits, is exempt from per-minute rate limit, and details URLs like upgrade_url, manage_url, and claim_url with human interaction context. No contradiction found.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Every sentence adds essential information. It is front-loaded with main purpose, then cost, then URL details, then restrictions. No fluff, well-organized.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters and an output schema (assumed), the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, cost, rate limit, key use cases, human-facing URLs, and exclusion for platform data. Complete and self-contained.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Input schema has no parameters, so description doesn't need to explain them. However, it adds value by describing the response structure including receipt ids, upgrade_url, etc., exceeding the baseline expectation for zero-parameter tools.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool checks 'balance, plan, limits, and the last 10 charges'. It specifies the verb 'check' and resource 'usage/credits', and is distinct from sibling tools which are Reddit-focused.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly advises when to use: 'call it whenever you need to budget'. Provides negative guidance: 'Not for fetching platform data'. Also details specific scenarios like blocked by credits/plan limits and keyless calls.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_get_postGet Reddit posts by id, with optional discussion threadARead-onlyInspect
Fetch full post content for up to 100 Reddit posts by their t3_ ids in one call -- the follow-up loop after reddit_search or reddit_get_subreddit_posts. Costs 4 credits for up to 10 ids, +1 credit per further 10 ids; every post comes back with its full body text. With exactly ONE id you may set detail to 'full' for +4 credits to also get the discussion tree (comments flattened in tree order with depth, about 200 per page, with a comments_cursor to continue), or pass comment_id (a t1_ id, also +4 credits) to fetch one specific comment in its post context. Post ids come from the other Reddit tools or from reddit_resolve_url on a post URL. Not for discovering posts; search first, then batch-fetch here.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| detail | No | ||
| post_ids | Yes | ||
| freshness | No | ||
| comment_id | No | ||
| max_credits | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description fully discloses behavioral traits beyond annotations. It confirms the tool is read-only (matching readOnlyHint), explains credit costs per operation, describes the format of comment trees (flattened with depth, pagination via cursor), and notes that each post returns full body text. No contradictions 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is dense but front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence provides value, though it could be slightly more concise. The structure flows logically from main purpose to usage, credits, and special cases.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (batch fetch with optional discussion threads), the description covers all essential aspects: usage flow, credit costs, limits (100 ids), special cases (single id with detail/comment_id), and pagination. Annotations and output schema (not shown) handle safety and return values.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well. It explains post_ids (array of t3_ ids, up to 100), detail ('full' for discussion tree, only with one id, +4 credits), comment_id (t1_ id, +4 credits), and cursor (for comment pagination). However, sort and freshness are not explained, and max_credits is only implied by the cost description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the primary action: 'Fetch full post content for up to 100 Reddit posts by their t3_ ids'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by positioning itself as the follow-up loop after discovery tools like reddit_search, and explicitly states it is not for discovering posts.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit guidance: 'the follow-up loop after reddit_search or reddit_get_subreddit_posts', 'Not for discovering posts; search first, then batch-fetch here.' It also mentions alternatives like reddit_resolve_url for post URLs and details the credit cost structure.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_get_subredditGet subreddit detailsARead-onlyInspect
Fetch one subreddit's profile: title, description, subscriber and active-user counts, age, NSFW flag, and topics. subreddit_name is the name without the r/ prefix, e.g. 'selfhosted'; a full reddit.com URL also works. Set include_settings to also get the community rules and moderator list for +2 credits (useful before posting or judging moderation culture). Costs 4 credits base. Subscriber counts here are the standard sizing signal for market research. This tool does not return posts: read the feed with reddit_get_subreddit_posts, and discover subreddits you don't know by name with reddit_search type=subreddits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| freshness | No | ||
| max_credits | No | ||
| subreddit_name | Yes | Subreddit name without the r/ prefix, e.g. 'selfhosted'. Full URLs are accepted and cleaned. | |
| include_settings | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds behavioral details: base cost 4 credits, +2 for include_settings, and that subscriber counts are a sizing signal. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single paragraph that is front-loaded with the core purpose, then efficiently covers usage, parameters, and alternatives without redundant information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the presence of an output schema and the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, how to use parameters, exclusions, and credit costs.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is low (25%), but description adds meaning for subreddit_name (format, full URL acceptance) and include_settings (what it returns, credit cost). Freshness and max_credits are not explained, but key parameters are well-addressed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it fetches a subreddit's profile details, explicitly differentiating from sibling tools: 'This tool does not return posts: read the feed with reddit_get_subreddit_posts, and discover subreddits you don't know by name with reddit_search type=subreddits.' It lists specific fields returned and the use of subreddit_name.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit guidance: when to use (for profile details, subscriber counts for market research), when to use include_settings (before posting, judging moderation culture), and directs to alternatives for posts and discovery. Also mentions credit costs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_get_subreddit_postsGet a subreddit's postsARead-onlyInspect
Fetch one page of posts from a single subreddit, the community-monitoring primitive. subreddit_name is the name without the r/ prefix. sort defaults to the subreddit's own front-page order (best); use sort=new for monitoring and top with a range for 'best of' research. Costs 4 credits per page; a cursor page is a NEW call priced the same way. Returns post summaries (title, author, upvotes, comment_count, created_at, permalink, id) with a cursor for older posts; bodies and discussions come from reddit_get_post with the returned ids. For keyword search across all of Reddit use reddit_search; this tool takes no query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | ||
| range | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| freshness | No | ||
| max_credits | No | ||
| subreddit_name | Yes | Subreddit name without the r/ prefix, e.g. 'selfhosted'. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds value beyond annotations by stating credit cost per page, that a cursor page is a new call at same cost, and that return fields exclude bodies/discussions (delegated to reddit_get_post). No contradiction with readOnlyHint and openWorldHint.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Concise paragraph that front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: name convention, sort hints, cost, return fields, and relationship to other tools. No redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers pagination, cost, and relationships with sibling tools. It also summarizes return fields and directs users to other tools for deeper data.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Though schema description coverage is low (17%), the description explains subreddit_name format and provides specific guidance for sort and range parameters. Lacks detailed explanations for cursor, freshness, and max_credits, but the context given is sufficient for common use.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states 'fetch one page of posts from a single subreddit' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like reddit_search (keyword search) and reddit_get_post (individual post details).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance: monitoring vs. research via sort values, and directs to reddit_search for keyword search. Mentions credit cost and pagination behavior.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_get_userGet a Reddit userARead-onlyInspect
Fetch one Reddit user's public profile: username, account age, karma, follower count, and description. username is the name without the u/ prefix, e.g. 'spez'; a full profile URL also works. Add up to 2 sections from comments|posts|subreddits at 2 credits each: comments and posts return that user's recent activity (first page), subreddits returns where they are active. Costs 4 credits base. Use this to profile loud voices found via reddit_search before quoting or engaging them. To find users by topic, use reddit_search type=users; this tool needs an exact username.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sections | No | ||
| username | Yes | Reddit username without the u/ prefix, e.g. 'spez'. Full profile URLs are accepted and cleaned. | |
| freshness | No | ||
| max_credits | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds valuable context: cost structure (4 credits base, extra 2 credits per section), input format (no u/ prefix, full URL works), and returns profile details. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two efficient sentences covering main purpose, usage, and options. Front-loaded with key info, no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers purpose, usage, sections, cost, and input format. Output schema exists, so return values are documented. Minor omission: freshness and max_credits not explained, but overall sufficient for agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is low (25%), but description compensates by explaining username format and sections. However, 'freshness' and 'max_credits' are not described, leaving gaps.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the tool fetches a Reddit user's public profile and specifies the data returned. Explicitly differentiates from sibling tool reddit_search by noting that this tool requires an exact username.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit guidance on when to use ('profile loud voices found via reddit_search before quoting or engaging them') and when to use an alternative ('To find users by topic, use reddit_search type=users').
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_resolve_urlIdentify a Reddit URLARead-onlyInspect
Identify what a Reddit URL points at before fetching it. Give any reddit.com or redd.it URL (share links, old.reddit.com, trailing params are fine); get back {type: subreddit|user|post|comment, id, handle, canonical_url}. Post URLs yield the t3_ id for reddit_get_post; comment permalinks yield the t1_ id; subreddit and user URLs yield the name for reddit_get_subreddit or reddit_get_user. Costs 2 credits and parses offline without fetching the page. Skip this tool when you already have a t3_/t1_ id, subreddit name, or username: the other Reddit tools accept those directly. Not for non-Reddit URLs; it returns INVALID_INPUT for those.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | A Reddit URL, e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1tbups6/... or https://redd.it/1tbups6. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: costs 2 credits, parses offline without fetching the page. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise and well-organized: purpose first, then input details, output mappings, cost, and usage exclusions. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has one parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema (mentioned), the description covers all needed context: input, output, cost, linkages to other tools, and error cases. It is complete for effective agent use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a single parameter 'url' described. The description adds meaning by listing acceptable URL variants (share links, old.reddit.com, trailing params) and explaining the return format, surpassing the schema description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool identifies what a Reddit URL points at. It specifies input types (reddit.com, redd.it URLs) and output structure (type, id, handle, canonical_url). It distinguishes from siblings by detailing how the output maps to other tools like reddit_get_post and reddit_get_subreddit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states when to use the tool (any Reddit URL) and when not to use it (when IDs or names are already known). It also mentions it's not for non-Reddit URLs and warns of INVALID_INPUT, providing clear guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
reddit_searchSearch Reddit posts, comments, subreddits, or usersARead-onlyInspect
Search all of Reddit by keywords. type picks the target: posts (default), comments (what people actually say about a product, problem, or brand -- unique to Reddit search), subreddits (find communities), users. Pass query as free text up to 256 characters; decompose broad topics into several narrower queries, since result depth per query is capped upstream around a few hundred results. sort applies to posts (relevance|top|new|hot|comment_count) and comments (relevance|top|new); range (past_hour..all_time) applies to posts only; both are rejected with INVALID_INPUT elsewhere. Costs 6 credits per page; a cursor page is a NEW call priced the same way. Returns one page of summaries (author, title or comment text, upvotes, comment_count, created_at, permalink, id) with a cursor; there is no server-side time window on comment search, so for monitoring filter on created_at yourself and poll with sort=new. Fetch full post bodies and discussion threads with reddit_get_post; read one community's feed with reddit_get_subreddit_posts. For high-volume recency sweeps across X instead, use x_search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | ||
| type | No | ||
| query | Yes | Free-text keywords, e.g. 'self hosted photo backup'. Not a URL; use reddit_resolve_url for URLs. | |
| range | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| freshness | No | ||
| max_credits | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| usage | Yes | |
| common | Yes | |
| entity | Yes | |
| platform | Yes | |
| freshness | Yes | |
| data_as_of | Yes | |
| canonical_url | Yes | |
| schema_version | Yes | |
| platform_fields | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses cost per page, cursor pagination, parameter rejection for invalid combinations, and lack of server-side time window for comments. These details go beyond the readOnly and openWorld annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Every sentence adds value; information is front-loaded with purpose and logically organized. No redundancy despite length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers all aspects: purpose, parameter behavior, usage nuances, cost, return format, and alternatives. With an output schema present, the return value description is a bonus.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Adds significant meaning for type, sort, range, cursor, and query beyond the sparse schema (14% coverage). Explains which values apply to which search modes. However, the 'freshness' parameter is not mentioned, leaving a minor gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool searches Reddit by keywords across posts, comments, subreddits, or users. It distinguishes each type with examples and differentiates from siblings like reddit_get_post and reddit_get_subreddit_posts.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit guidance on when to use each type, how to decompose broad topics, and which sort/range parameters apply to which types. Advises against using for high-volume sweeps (recommends x_search) and explains polling strategy for comment search.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!