Skip to main content
Glama
flukeatzerocool

Infobroker

by flukeatzerocool
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Inspect Providers

infobroker_inspect_providers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect configured search providers to diagnose slow or empty results: list their state, run live health checks, or report build and spec identity.

Instructions

Inspect configured search providers: list their state, run a live health check, or report build and spec identity. Use when searches return empty or slow results and you want provider status, quota, or latency, or when choosing which backend to trust. Do NOT use to search (use infobroker_search_web) or to read a page (use infobroker_fetch_page). Read-only: it reports state and never modifies configuration, providers, or stored data. Action semantics: list snapshots provider state locally; health runs a live outbound probe against the provider named in provider (external calls subject to that provider's rate limits and availability, so it can be slow); spec reports build and spec identity locally. status only filters list; provider is required for the health action. Returns a JSON envelope prefixed [OK] or [ERROR] with status, provider, and results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesOperation to perform
statusNoFilter for list action
providerNoProvider slug (required for health)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations, the description explicitly states that the tool never modifies configuration, providers, or stored data. It also discloses that the health action performs a live outbound probe subject to rate limits and availability, which is important behavioral context not captured by the annotations alone.

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 well-structured and concise despite covering multiple actions and caveats. It front-loads the core purpose, then gives usage guidance, action semantics, and return format without unnecessary repetition or filler.

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 moderate complexity of three actions and conditional parameters, the description is complete. It explains return format ([OK] or [ERROR] envelope), the role of each action, and how the parameters interact, providing enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without an output schema.

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?

The schema descriptions are complete, and the tool description adds essential semantics: it explains what each action does, that 'status' only filters the 'list' action, and that 'provider' is required for 'health' despite being optional in the schema. This significantly enriches the bare parameter descriptions.

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's purpose as inspecting configured search providers via three explicit actions (list, health, spec), and explains when to use it (for provider status, quota, latency, or choosing a backend). It also explicitly differentiates it from search and fetch tools, leaving no ambiguity about its scope.

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 provides concrete usage guidance, including when to use the tool ('when searches return empty or slow results') and when not to use it, naming the alternative tools (infobroker_search_web and infobroker_fetch_page). It also explains the semantics of each action, making the intended use clear.

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