Skip to main content
Glama
CaptchaAI MCP Server

CaptchaAI MCP Server

Official
by CaptchaAI

Get Supported Captchas

get_supported_captchas
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists supported token-mode CAPTCHA types with required and optional arguments plus capabilities, helping you identify the applicable challenge format. Works without an API key.

Instructions

List all supported token-mode CAPTCHA types with required/optional arguments and capabilities.

Works without an API key.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_supported_captchas"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuinely new context: the auth requirement ('Works without an API key') and the shape of the returned information, which an agent cannot infer from the annotations alone.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed by the one non-obvious operational fact (no API key needed). No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

For a zero-parameter discovery tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs is missing. The description covers what is listed, what each item contains, and the auth exemption; return-value formatting is rightly left to the output schema.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a no-arg tool applies. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter detail and instead describes the payload of the response.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (List) and a precisely scoped resource (supported token-mode CAPTCHA types), and adds what each entry contains (required/optional arguments and capabilities). The 'token-mode' qualifier usefully narrows scope versus solve_captcha, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: this is clearly a discovery/reference call, and 'Works without an API key' tells the agent it can be called before authenticating. There is no explicit when-to-use versus solve_captcha guidance, but the purpose is narrow enough that the intent is unambiguous.

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