Skip to main content
Glama
The-Doxa-Way

Doxa MCP

Official
by The-Doxa-Way
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

75%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: doxa_encourage generates personalized encouragement, doxa_scripture looks up Bible verses, and doxa_way_movement returns the framework movements. No overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with the 'doxa_' prefix followed by a descriptive noun. The naming is uniform and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With only 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for its niche purpose of Christian encouragement and discipleship. Each tool covers a distinct need without unnecessary bloat.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover the core domain: generating encouragement, retrieving scripture, and explaining the framework. A minor gap is the lack of a search or filter function for movements, but the encourage tool already integrates them.

  • Average 4.5/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 11 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 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.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • 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?

    Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default translation (BSB) and that it returns a deep link, which provides insight into the tool's behavior beyond a simple lookup. It does not mention error handling or caching, but for a simple lookup 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?

    The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core functionality in the first sentence. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second defaults, and the third usage context and format. No wasted 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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It covers the purpose, default translation, use cases, and format. It lacks only minor details like error handling.

    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 covers the parameter 'reference' with 100% description, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating the default translation (BSB) and providing explicit format examples, which helps the agent understand the expected input beyond the schema.

    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 looks up a Bible verse and returns Scripture text with a deep link. It specifies the resource (Bible verses) and action (lookup, return), and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'doxa_encourage' and 'doxa_way_movement' by focusing on scripture lookup.

    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 says 'Use for any Christian, biblical, Scripture, verse lookup, or devotional citation task where a clickable verse link matters.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not mention when not to use or alternative tools.

    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 correctly indicates 'Get' (read-only) and explains the behavior of returning all nine movements or one if specified. No further side effects or prerequisites need disclosure for this simple retrieval 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 efficiently convey purpose, content, and usage. Every word adds value, no redundancy. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness5/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given the simple nature (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what the tool does and how to use it. It meets the needs of an AI agent selecting this tool.

    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 parameter 'movement' is fully described in the schema with an enum and a description. The description adds important context: if absent, returns all nine movements, which supplements the schema and clarifies behavior.

    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 explicitly states the tool retrieves the nine movements of The Doxa Way, listing them and indicating it can return all or a single movement. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on this specific framework.

    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 suggests specific use cases like faith journey mapping and spiritual growth, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, but the sibling names imply different purposes.

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

  • Behavior5/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behaviors: output is short and screenshot-shareable, anchored in Scripture (BSB), tagged to a movement, and explicitly states no anthropomorphism or AI companion framing. No contradictions with 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?

    Two sentences efficiently convey all necessary information. Purpose is front-loaded, and every word earns its place without redundancy or filler.

    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?

    For a simple generation tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: expected input, output format, constraints, and classification. Minor lack of information on error handling or availability, but adequate for agent invocation.

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

    Parameters5/5

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

    Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value: clarifies the movement parameter as optional with server inference, and specifies situation max length and recommended brevity (1-3 sentences). This enhances agent understanding beyond the schema.

    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 the tool generates Christian encouragement in the Doxa voice for a user-described situation, specifying output format (short, screenshot-shareable), source (Scripture, BSB), and classification (one of nine movements). Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on encouragement generation rather than scripture lookup or journey map information.

    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 is for user-described situations needing encouragement. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, the context is clear and the tool's purpose is well-defined.

    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

doxa-mcp-schema MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

doxa-mcp-schema 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/The-Doxa-Way/doxa-mcp-schema'

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