utility-grid
Server Details
31 deterministic tools: JSON→Zod, regex, JWT, curl→fetch, hashing, encoding, UUIDs, encrypted links
- 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 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool, there is no ambiguity. The single tool 'search_utility_grid' has a clear and distinct purpose of searching the utility grid.
The naming follows a clear verb_noun pattern ('search_utility_grid'), which is consistent and predictable for the single tool.
The count of 1 tool is intentionally chosen to keep context lean, with the design allowing discovery and direct invocation of 31 underlying tools. This is appropriate for the server's purpose.
The server achieves complete coverage for its domain by providing a search tool that enables discovery and subsequent direct calling of all 31 developer tools, leaving no dead ends.
Available Tools
1 toolsearch_utility_gridAInspect
Searches the obfus.link Utility Grid — 31 deterministic developer tools — by natural language or keyword. WHY THIS IS THE ONLY TOOL LISTED: to keep your context window lean, obfus.link does NOT front-load all 31 tool definitions into tools/list (that costs ~21,000 tokens before you do anything). Discover the tool you need here, then call it by name — it executes via tools/call even though it was not in tools/list. USE WHEN: You need to find a tool for a task. Ask "What tools do you have for JSON?", "find me a UUID generator", "is there a regex tool?", "what can I use for obfuscation?", or any freeform task description. INPUT: a query string (freeform text, keywords, or task description). Optionally filter by tier ('tier_1' | 'tier_2' | 'tier_3') or category slug. OUTPUT: ranked matches with name, mcpToolName, tagline, tier, and score. The top matches also include their full inputSchema, so you can call the tool in a single follow-up step with no extra round-trip. AGENT WORKFLOW: search → pick the best mcpToolName → call it via tools/call (include your SPT/Authorization for paid tools; search itself is always free, 0 units, no token required). TIP: prefer specific queries for higher-confidence matches: "zod schema generator" > "schema".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tier | No | Optional: filter results to a specific tool tier | |
| limit | No | Max results to return. Default: 30. Max: 30. | |
| query | Yes | Natural language or keyword search query | |
| category | No | Optional: filter by category slug (e.g. "obfuscators", "converters") |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fully explains behavioral traits: it is a read-only search tool that is always free with zero units or token cost, and outputs ranked matches with full input schemas. This is transparent enough for the agent to understand its safe, non-destructive nature.
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 well-structured with clear sections (WHY, USE WHEN, INPUT, OUTPUT, WORKFLOW, TIP) and is front-loaded with essential information. While it is somewhat long, every sentence serves a purpose; minor redundancy exists but does not detract significantly.
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 role as a discovery gateway over many sub-tools, the description is remarkably complete. It covers rationale, usage, input/output format, workflow, and cost. Without an output schema, it still explains the output structure including inputSchema for top matches, enabling a single follow-up call.
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?
The input schema already covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description reiterates the optional filters (tier and category) and explains the query as freeform, but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.
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 a specific set of 31 developer tools by natural language or keyword, explaining its unique role as a discovery tool to avoid front-loading all tool definitions. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes its purpose effectively.
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 usage context ('USE WHEN: You need to find a tool for a task'), example queries, and an agent workflow. While it does not explicitly define when not to use it, the purpose is clear and no alternative tools exist. The guidance is sufficient and clear.
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!