Skip to main content
Glama
AperionAI

aperion-shield

Official
by AperionAI
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Rust
Local

Server Quality Checklist

75%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.3

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one lists directory contents with sizes, the other moves or renames files. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Both tools use snake_case and follow a verb_noun pattern, but 'list_directory_with_sizes' includes an extra descriptor ('with_sizes') that diverges slightly from the simpler 'move_file'. The pattern is mostly consistent.

    Tool Count2/5

    With only two tools, the server appears under-scoped for file system operations. Typical file operations would require at least a handful of tools (e.g., read, write, delete, create directory), making the count too low for practical use.

    Completeness1/5

    The tool set lacks essential file operations such as reading file contents, writing or editing files, deleting files or directories, and creating directories. This severely limits the agent's ability to perform meaningful work within the allowed directories.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 28 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • View related servers

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds behavioral context by mentioning the [FILE] and [DIR] prefixes and the allowed directories constraint. No contradictions; it aligns with the read-only nature.

    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 three sentences, all essential. It front-loads the main action and follows with useful details. No wasted words.

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

    Completeness5/5

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

    Given the output schema exists and the annotations provide read-only context, the description covers purpose, usage constraints, and output format. It is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

    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?

    The schema covers only 50% of parameters (sortBy has a description, path does not). The description adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema, only stating 'in a specified path.' It does not compensate for the low coverage.

    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's action: 'Get a detailed listing of all files and directories in a specified path, including sizes.' It also highlights the distinguishing feature of [FILE] and [DIR] prefixes, which differentiates it from the sibling tool 'move_file'.

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

    Usage Guidelines4/5

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

    The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'useful for understanding directory structure and finding specific files within a directory.' It also adds a constraint: 'Only works within allowed directories.' However, it does not explicitly compare with the sibling tool or specify when not to use it.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Discloses failure if destination exists and cross-directory behavior. Annotations already destructiveHint=true, but description adds context beyond annotations.

    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?

    Three sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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

    Completeness4/5

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

    Covers purpose, conditions, and constraints. Output schema exists but not shown; description is sufficient for a simple move/rename tool.

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

    Parameters3/5

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

    Adds meaning by stating paths and allowed directories constraint, but schema coverage is 0% and description could provide more parameter details (e.g., format, relative vs absolute).

    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?

    Description clearly states 'Move or rename files and directories' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling 'list_directory_with_sizes'.

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

    Usage Guidelines4/5

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

    Provides guidance on when destination exists (fail), cross-directory use, and constraints (within allowed directories). Lacks explicit alternative or when-not-to-use.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

shield MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

shield MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AperionAI/shield'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server