Skip to main content
Glama
childrentime

ReactUse

by childrentime
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions

Server Quality Checklist

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

  • Latest release: v6.5.3

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: get_hook retrieves details for a specific hook, list_hooks lists all hooks with optional category filter, and search_hooks performs a relevance-ranked search. No ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_hooks, get_hook, search_hooks) using snake_case, making them predictable and easy to understand.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools is minimal but perfectly scoped for the server's purpose: discovering and retrieving information about React hooks. Each tool earns its place without being over- or under-abundant.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set covers the essential operations for a hook library: listing all hooks (with filtering), searching, and fetching full details for a specific hook. There are no obvious gaps given the read-only nature of the domain.

  • Average 4.3/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.

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

    • 5 of 5 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 60 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under The Unlicense.

  • 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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying the exact content returned (description, usage example, API table), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

    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 sentence that conveys the complete purpose. No extraneous information; every word earns its place.

    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 low complexity (1 parameter), presence of output schema, and clear annotations, the description is fully adequate. It tells the agent what the tool does and what it returns, without needing further elaboration.

    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?

    Only one parameter (hook_name) with schema description coverage at 100%. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides; it simply restates the purpose. Baseline of 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 verb ('Fetch') and resource ('full documentation for a specific @reactuses/core React hook by name'). It distinguishes from sibling tools (list_hooks, search_hooks) by specifying that it targets a single hook by name and returns detailed documentation.

    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 implies use when one needs detailed docs for a specific hook. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with siblings, but the context is clear and the sibling list is provided in the context signals.

    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?

    Annotations already provide read-only and idempotent safety info. Description adds behavioral detail about optional filtering, which is useful beyond annotations. No contradictions.

    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?

    Single sentence, no redundancy, immediately states purpose and optionality. Highly concise and well-structured.

    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 simple list tool with annotations and output schema, the description fully covers all necessary context: what it lists, and optional filtering. No missing information.

    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 covers parameter fully with enum and description. Description only reiterates the category filter as optional, adding no new meaning. With 100% coverage, baseline of 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?

    Description clearly states the tool lists all hooks from a specific library, optionally filtered by category. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_hook (single hook) and search_hooks (search by term).

    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?

    Implicitly suggests use when listing hooks or filtering by category, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide direct alternatives. Sibling names offer context but exclusions are missing.

    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?

    The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context: results are 'ranked by relevance' and match on name, description, or content, going beyond what annotations provide.

    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 extremely concise (two sentences) with no wasted words. All information is front-loaded and directly useful.

    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 low complexity (2 parameters, clear search functionality, output schema present), the description is complete. It correctly omits redundant details about the return structure since an output schema exists.

    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% (both parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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 defines the action ('Search'), the resource ('@reactuses/core hooks'), and the scope ('by name, description, or content'). It also mentions relevance ranking, which differentiates it from the sibling tools 'get_hook' (single retrieval) and 'list_hooks' (listing all).

    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 implies when to use this tool (for searching hooks by text) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the sibling context makes the usage clear.

    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

reactuse MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

reactuse 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/childrentime/reactuse'

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