everthread
OfficialServer Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| check_siteA | Run EverThread's free security check on a website's home page. One fresh check per site per week; within that week you get the stored result with its age, and a |
| explain_findingA | Explain one EverThread finding type in plain English: what it means, why it matters, how to fix it, and the developer line. Use list_findings for the type names. |
| list_findingsB | Every finding type EverThread reports, with its urgency and a link to the plain-English page. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
check_site (run a scan), list_findings (enumerate all finding types), and explain_finding (deep-dive on one type) target distinct needs, and the description explicitly tells the agent to use list_findings for type names. The only mild overlap is between list_findings and explain_finding, both of which concern finding types, but their granularity (catalog vs. single explanation) keeps them separable.
All three names follow a clean verb_noun snake_case pattern: list_findings, check_site, explain_finding. No casing or verb-style mixing, and each name is self-descriptive.
Three tools is lean but defensible for a focused security-check service: one action, one catalog, one explainer. It sits just under the comfortable range, as there is no room for managing or revisiting checks, but nothing is redundant.
The surface covers running a check and interpreting results, but has notable gaps: no tool to list previously checked sites or retrieve past/historical results, and despite the description touting a free daily watch, no tool exposes enabling or managing that monitoring. Agents can work around these for a one-off scan but hit a dead end for lifecycle/tracking workflows.