Skip to main content
Glama
Firnschnee

Dual Model MCP Server

by Firnschnee

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v1.0.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or ambiguity between tools.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The single tool name 'query_dual_models' is descriptive and follows a clear verb_noun pattern; consistency is trivially maintained.

    Tool Count5/5

    The server has a narrow, focused purpose of querying dual models, and one tool fully covers that functionality without excess or deficiency.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool provides complete coverage for the server's domain: sending queries to multiple models and optionally synthesizing results. No obvious gaps exist.

  • Average 4.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 10 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available
  • 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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Describes parallel query behavior, return of multiple responses, optional synthesis, and default system prompt. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It is transparent about the main actions and does not contradict annotations (none exist). Could mention auth or rate limits, but overall sufficient for a read-like operation.

    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 sentences, no fluff. Each sentence adds critical information: first on core functionality, second on options and defaults. Highly efficient.

    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?

    Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main flow (parallel, multiple models, synthesis, defaults). It could detail the return format (e.g., array of responses), but for a multi-model query tool, it is sufficiently complete.

    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?

    Schema description coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by specifying default models (anthropic/claude-opus-4.8, openai/gpt-5.5), mentioning 'parallel' execution, and describing the standard system prompt behavior (6-8 paragraphs), which is absent in the schema parameter descriptions.

    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?

    Clearly states it sends a prompt in parallel to multiple models via OpenRouter and returns responses side by side with optional synthesis. Verb 'schickt' and resource 'Modelle via OpenRouter' are specific and distinct. No sibling tools exist, so no differentiation needed.

    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?

    Implies usage for comparing multiple model responses or obtaining a synthesized output. Mentions default models, default system prompt, and optional synthesis. Lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, but given no siblings, the context is clear enough.

    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

dual-model-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

dual-model-mcp 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/Firnschnee/dual-model-mcp'

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