Skip to main content
Glama
chatmcp

mcp-server-collector

by chatmcp

submit-mcp-server

Submit an MCP server URL to the MCP Servers Directory for inclusion in the public registry, enabling discovery and integration.

Instructions

Submit MCP Server to MCP Servers Directory like mcp.so

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL of the MCP Server to submit
avatar_urlNoavatar URL of the MCP Server to submit

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that submits the MCP server by POSTing to an endpoint defined in MCP_SERVER_SUBMIT_URL environment variable.
    async def submit_mcp_server(url: str, avatar_url: str):
        payload = {
            "url": url,
            "avatar_url": avatar_url
        }
    
        try:
            async with aiohttp.ClientSession() as session:
                async with session.post(
                    os.getenv("MCP_SERVER_SUBMIT_URL"),
                    headers={"Content-Type": "application/json"},
                    data=json.dumps(payload)
                ) as response:
                    if response.status == 200:
                        return await response.json()
                    else:
                        raise Exception(f"submit mcp server failed: HTTP {response.status}")
                  
        except Exception as e:
            raise Exception(f"submit mcp server failed: {str(e)}")
  • Input schema definition for the 'submit-mcp-server' tool, specifying required 'url' and optional 'avatar_url'.
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "url": {
                "type": "string",
                "description": "URL of the MCP Server to submit",
            },
            "avatar_url": {
                "type": "string",
                "description": "avatar URL of the MCP Server to submit",
            },
        },
        "required": ["url"],
    },
  • Registration of the 'submit-mcp-server' tool in the list_tools handler, including name, description, and schema.
    types.Tool(
        name="submit-mcp-server",
        description="Submit MCP Server to MCP Servers Directory like mcp.so",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "url": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "URL of the MCP Server to submit",
                },
                "avatar_url": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "avatar URL of the MCP Server to submit",
                },
            },
            "required": ["url"],
        },
    ),
  • Dispatcher handler in call_tool that extracts arguments, calls submit_mcp_server, and returns the JSON result as TextContent.
    case "submit-mcp-server":
        url = arguments.get("url")
        avatar_url = arguments.get("avatar_url") or ""
        result = await submit_mcp_server(url, avatar_url)
        content = json.dumps(result)
    
        return [
            types.TextContent(
                type="text",
                text=content,
            )
        ]
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool submits to a directory 'like mcp.so', implying a public listing or registration, but doesn't clarify permissions required, rate limits, whether the submission is reversible, or what happens on success/failure. This is inadequate for a tool that likely involves external API calls.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or behavioral details like authentication needs. For a submission tool with external dependencies, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how to use it effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('url' and 'avatar_url') with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Submit') and resource ('MCP Server to MCP Servers Directory like mcp.so'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'extract-mcp-servers-from-content' or 'extract-mcp-servers-from-url', which appear to be extraction tools rather than submission tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context for submission, or how it differs from sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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/chatmcp/mcp-server-collector'

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