Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
urai-router

urai-router

Official
by etside
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

urai_health

Check router health, key file status, catalogue freshness, and proxy availability to diagnose routing issues and confirm readiness.

Instructions

Show router health, key file, catalogue freshness and proxy status.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "urai_health"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Show" implies a non-mutating read and the sentence does reveal the categories of information returned, but it says nothing about permissions, behavior when the router is unreachable, or whether any state is refreshed as a side effect.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; each listed item (health, key file, catalogue freshness, proxy status) adds distinct information. Nothing could be removed without losing coverage.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of return-content information, and it does enumerate the four areas inspected, which is what an agent mainly needs for a zero-argument diagnostic. It falls short on output shape and failure behavior, but those gaps are minor for a tool this simple.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies; the enumerated subjects are the only meaningful qualifiers available.

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?

"Show router health, key file, catalogue freshness and proxy status" gives a specific verb (Show) plus an enumerated set of resources, so an agent knows exactly what information this returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from plausible siblings like urai_check or urai_stats, which likely surface overlapping diagnostic information.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the description reads as a status/diagnostic call, which an agent can infer from the health/proxy framing. There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus urai_check, urai_stats, or urai_ensure_proxy, and no preconditions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools