Skip to main content
Glama
FabrWill

GraphQL MCP Server

by FabrWill

inspect

Analyze the GraphQL server's schema and capabilities to understand available queries, mutations, and data structures for API interaction.

Instructions

Inspect this server

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
__ignore__NoThis does not do anything

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'inspect' tool that logs 'Inspecting server' and returns a text content block with 'This is a test'.
    async () => {
      console.log("Inspecting server");
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: "This is a test",
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Zod input schema for the 'inspect' tool, defining an optional ignored boolean parameter.
    {
      __ignore__: z
        .boolean()
        .default(false)
        .describe("This does not do anything"),
    },
  • src/index.ts:56-76 (registration)
    Registration of the 'inspect' tool via server.tool(), specifying name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
      "inspect",
      "Inspect this server",
      {
        __ignore__: z
          .boolean()
          .default(false)
          .describe("This does not do anything"),
      },
      async () => {
        console.log("Inspecting server");
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: "This is a test",
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
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. 'Inspect this server' implies a read-only operation, but it does not specify what is inspected (e.g., configuration, status, logs), whether it requires authentication, any rate limits, or the format of results. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the implied action, failing to compensate for the lack of 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?

The description is extremely concise with just three words: 'Inspect this server'. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though this brevity contributes to its lack of detail. Every word serves a purpose, even if that purpose is minimal, making it structurally efficient.

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 name suggests potential complexity (e.g., server inspection could involve multiple aspects), the description is incomplete. With no annotations, no output schema, and a vague purpose, it fails to provide enough context for an agent to understand what the tool does, how to use it effectively, or what to expect in return. The high schema coverage for a trivial parameter does not compensate for these broader gaps.

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 1 parameter with 100% description coverage, and the parameter '__ignore__' is documented as 'This does not do anything' with a default value. The description does not mention parameters, but since schema coverage is high and there is only one parameter that is non-functional, the baseline is elevated. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, but the parameter's trivial nature justifies a score above the minimum.

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 'Inspect this server' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'inspect' with minimal additional information. It specifies the resource ('this server') but lacks a clear, specific verb or action that distinguishes what 'inspect' entails compared to siblings like 'introspect' and 'query'. This makes the purpose vague and under-specified.

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 versus alternatives like 'introspect' or 'query'. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no information to make an informed choice among sibling tools. This absence of usage guidelines is a significant gap.

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/FabrWill/gql-mcp'

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