Skip to main content
Glama
ErickWendel

Erick Wendel Contributions MCP

by ErickWendel

check_status

Verify the API connectivity and response status for Erick Wendel's content server to ensure reliable access to talks, blogs, and videos.

Instructions

Check if the API is alive and responding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'check_status' tool. It calls checkApiStatus() to check the API health and returns an MCP response with the status.
    handler: async (): Promise<McpResponse> => {
      try {
        const result = await checkApiStatus();
    
        const content: McpTextContent = {
          type: "text",
          text: `API Status: ${result.isAlive ? "Online" : "Offline"}`
        };
    
        return {
          content: [content],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        throw new Error(`Failed to check API status: ${error.message}`);
      }
    }
  • src/index.ts:42-47 (registration)
    Registration of the checkStatusTool in the MCP server using server.tool().
    server.tool(
      checkStatusTool.name,
      checkStatusTool.description,
      checkStatusTool.parameters,
      checkStatusTool.handler
    );
  • Configuration schema for the check_status tool, providing name and description used in the tool definition.
    status: {
      name: "check_status",
      description: "Check if the API is alive and responding."
    }
  • Helper function checkApiStatus() that queries the GraphQL API's isAlive field to check status.
    export async function checkApiStatus(): Promise<StatusResponse> {
      return await client.query({
        isAlive: true,
      }) as StatusResponse;
    } 
  • Input parameters schema for the check_status tool (no parameters required).
    parameters: {},
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool checks API status but doesn't add context such as what 'alive and responding' entails (e.g., response time, error handling), rate limits, or authentication needs. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no structured safety hints.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output expectations, which could be helpful for an agent to understand the full scope of this health check tool.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary information beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('check') and resource ('API'), explaining it verifies if the API is alive and responding. However, it doesn't distinguish this from its siblings (get_posts, get_talks, get_videos), which appear to be data retrieval tools, so it misses explicit differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description implies usage for health checks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, timing, or comparison to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer context without clear direction.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/ErickWendel/erickwendel-contributions-mcp'

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