Skip to main content
Glama

Security Header Inspection

inspect_security_headers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect security response headers of a public URL to assess browser-facing security baseline for quick due diligence.

Instructions

Fetch a public URL and inspect security-relevant response headers before you claim that a product or endpoint has a strong browser-facing security baseline. Use this for quick due diligence on public apps and docs sites. It checks for common headers such as HSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy, and X-Content-Type-Options. It does not replace a real security review, authenticated testing, or vulnerability scanning.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic http(s) URL or bare domain to inspect. Bare domains are normalized to https:// automatically.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputUrlNoOriginal user input when normalization changed it.
urlYesNormalized URL that was fetched.
accessibleYesTrue when the endpoint returned an HTTP response.
statusNoHTTP status code returned by the endpoint.
httpsYesTrue when the normalized URL used https.
presentCountNoNumber of tracked security headers that were present.
scoreNoHeuristic security-header score based on how many tracked headers were present.
headersNoTracked response headers and their raw values when present.
missingRecommendedNoTracked headers that were not present on the response.
errorNoValidation or network error when the request could not be completed.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by listing the specific headers checked (HSTS, CSP, etc.) and clarifying it's for public URLs only. No contradiction 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loading the primary purpose and then providing usage context and limitations. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

For a tool with a single parameter, clear schema, and output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and limitations. It is complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 a clear description for the 'url' parameter. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, so 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 fetches a public URL and inspects security headers, using specific verbs ('fetch', 'inspect') and resource ('security headers'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'assess_compliance_posture' and 'check_endpoint' by focusing on browser-facing security headers.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use ('before you claim that a product or endpoint has a strong browser-facing security baseline', 'quick due diligence on public apps and docs sites') and includes exclusions ('does not replace a real security review, authenticated testing, or vulnerability scanning'). This provides clear guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/anish632/ground-truth-mcp'

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