content-qa-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| qa_full_reportA | Run every check (readability, AI-writing tells, on-page SEO) on one article and return a single report. Every finding comes with the fix attached. Accepts raw HTML (preferred) or plain text; the SEO check only runs on HTML input. |
| readability_checkA | Flesch-Kincaid grade, long-sentence and passive-voice findings for article prose. Plain text in; findings with fixes out. |
| ai_tell_scanA | Scan prose for machine-writing tells: stock phrases (delve into, in today's fast-paced world, ...), em/en-dash density, arrow glyphs, emoji. Findings with fixes. |
| seo_onpage_checkB | Title, meta description, heading structure, image alt coverage, internal links, and keyword usage for one article's HTML. Built for well-formed CMS article output (WordPress, Ghost, static sites), not adversarial markup. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| qa_review | Review an article with the QA tools and write the editorial verdict a client can act on. |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of content QA: readability, AI tells, on-page SEO, and a combined full report. There's no overlapping purpose; the full report explicitly aggregates the other three, which is clear.
All names use lowercase_with_underscores and are descriptive noun phrases. Minor inconsistency in word type ('report', 'check', 'scan') but no mixing of conventions, so it's mostly predictable.
Four tools is well-scoped for a content QA server, covering the core checks and an aggregated report. Each tool earns its place without unnecessary bloat or overly thin coverage.
The server covers the primary QA dimensions for articles: readability, AI-writing tells, and on-page SEO, plus a comprehensive report. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated domain.