Skip to main content
Glama
Auxin-io

Hello World MCP Server

by Auxin-io
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tool names to compare it with. The name 'Secure-Agent-MCP' stands alone without any conflicting patterns or styles.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is too few for most server purposes, making it feel thin and limiting functionality. While it might suffice for a minimal 'Hello World' example, it lacks the breadth expected for practical agent interactions in typical domains.

    Completeness1/5

    The server is severely incomplete; with only one tool that returns a simple message, there is no coverage of any meaningful domain or lifecycle operations. It fails to provide a usable surface for agents to perform tasks beyond a trivial response.

  • Average 2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • 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.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • 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.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

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

  • Behavior1/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to do so. It does not mention any behavioral traits like safety mechanisms, trustworthiness criteria, response format, or potential side effects. The phrase 'safe and trustable' is too vague to convey actionable information about the tool's behavior.

    Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

    Conciseness4/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    The description is very concise—a single sentence—and front-loaded with its main claim. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative, lacking necessary details. It avoids redundancy but at the cost of clarity, so it scores slightly above minimal.

    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?

    Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, 100% schema coverage, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'safe and trustable message' means, how it's generated, or what the return value entails. Without annotations or output schema, the description should provide more context to be useful.

    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?

    The schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'name' clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without compensating value.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose2/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description 'Returns a safe and trustable message' is vague and tautological—it essentially restates the tool name 'Secure Agent MCP' without specifying what the tool actually does. There is no clear verb-resource pairing (e.g., 'greet a user' or 'generate a secure message'), and it fails to distinguish from any siblings (though none exist).

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

    Usage Guidelines1/5

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

    The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, such as in what contexts or scenarios it applies. There are no alternatives mentioned, no prerequisites, and no explicit or implied usage instructions—it's completely lacking in practical guidance.

    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

Demo-MCP-Server-Smithery MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

Demo-MCP-Server-Smithery 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/Auxin-io/Demo-MCP-Server-Smithery'

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