Skip to main content
Glama
McpStorefront

storefront-mcp

by McpStorefront
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a distinct function: search for listings, get detail of a specific listing, and start a booking. No overlap in purpose.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case: search_listings, get_listing_detail, start_mock_booking.

    Tool Count4/5

    Three tools is minimal but covers the core workflow of searching, viewing details, and booking. Slightly under for a full-featured storefront, but acceptable.

    Completeness3/5

    Covers search, detail, and booking, but lacks common operations like canceling or modifying bookings, or managing user profiles. Notable gaps exist.

  • Average 4/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored. Lowest: 3.2/5.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 3 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under Apache 2.0.

  • 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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It indicates the output is mock and simulated, implying no real side effects, but does not explicitly state safety or data mutation details.

    Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

    Conciseness4/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    The description is a single sentence that is concise. However, the mix of Spanish title and English description might cause confusion.

    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?

    Lacks details on parameter usage and output format. With no output schema, the description should clarify what the summary and link contain, but it does not.

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

    Parameters1/5

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

    Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not mention any of the three parameters (listingId, guests, nights). It provides no meaning beyond the schema's field names and types.

    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?

    The description clearly states the tool generates a mock booking summary and simulated payment link, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_listings and get_listing_detail which deal with listing information.

    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?

    No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied for testing, but no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' is provided.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool returns up to 3 interactive visual cards for selection and navigation to detail/booking. It does not cover error handling or authentication, but for a search tool this is adequate.

    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 well-structured paragraph. Every sentence adds value: first states function, then output behavior, then usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

    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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the output as visual cards and usage context. It lacks details like sorting, default behavior, or error info, but is reasonably complete for a search tool.

    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?

    Schema coverage is 100%, with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds context about the catalog and city but does not significantly enhance the schema's information. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

    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?

    The description clearly states the tool searches for temporary rentals in CDMX using various filters like neighborhood, guests, price, room type, and free text. It specifies the resource and action, and differentiates from siblings 'get_listing_detail' and 'start_mock_booking'.

    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?

    The description explicitly tells when to use the tool: when the user asks for accommodation, wants to compare options, or asks what's available. It implies alternatives via sibling names but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states it's a read operation returning property details. No contradictions. It could mention error handling (e.g., if ID not found) or authentication, but for a simple read tool, this is sufficient.

    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?

    A single sentence in Spanish, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action and purpose. Perfectly concise for the complexity of the tool.

    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 no output schema, the description outlines what the result includes (description, amenities, host). For a one-parameter read tool, this is adequate. Could detail response language or missing ID behavior, but the tool's simplicity limits the gap.

    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 schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'id'. The description adds context: 'dado su ID numérico' and the schema description ties it to 'search_listings'. This adds meaning beyond raw type/description, linking the parameter to its source.

    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?

    The description uses a specific verb ('Devuelve') and resource ('ficha completa de una propiedad del catálogo'), listing included fields ('descripción, amenities, anfitrión') and condition ('dado su ID numérico'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_listings' which returns lists.

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

    Usage Guidelines5/5

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

    Explicit usage context: 'Usala para responder preguntas puntuales sobre una propiedad que ya apareció en una búsqueda previa'. This tells the agent when to use this tool (after a search) and implies not to use for initial searches. It also references the sibling 'search_listings' for the ID source.

    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

storefront-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

storefront-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/McpStorefront/storefront-mcp'

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