Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Ninja MCP

Ninja MCP

by Khaled-Harthi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Verify Ninja Login OTP

ninja_auth_verify_otp

Verify the one-time login OTP to authenticate and enable reuse of the saved device auth key.

Instructions

Verify the one-time Ninja login OTP. After this, the saved device auth key can be reused by this MCP.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "otp": "<otp>"
    },
    "name": "ninja_auth_verify_otp"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
otpYesLogin OTP.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavioral side effect of enabling auth key reuse, but fails to mention success/failure behavior, rate limits, or security implications. The minimal disclosure is insufficient for a security-sensitive verification tool.

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, front-loaded with purpose and followed by a consequential outcome. No unnecessary words or repetition. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description is adequate but lacks details such as prerequisites (e.g., call ninja_auth_start_login first), error handling, or output format. The absence of output schema and annotations further limits completeness.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear pattern and description for 'otp'. The description adds no new information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Verify' and the resource 'one-time Ninja login OTP'. It also explains the consequence (reuse of saved device auth key), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'ninja_auth_start_login' (initiation) and 'ninja_auth_status' (status check).

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?

The description implies a sequential usage ('After this, the saved device auth key can be reused'), giving context about when to call this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among the 18 sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools