Skip to main content
Glama
forgemeshlabs

aso-audit-mcp

by forgemeshlabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get a prioritized ASO fix plan

get_fix_plan

Scan a site to get a prioritized fix plan: which signals to add first, ASO Score points, and ready-to-paste templates for agent readiness.

Instructions

Scan a site and return a prioritized remediation plan: which signals to add first, the ASO Score points each fix is worth, and ready-to-paste artifact templates (robots.txt AI rules, llms.txt, agent.json, A2A agent-card.json, MCP server card, x402 manifest, pricing.json, security.txt, status endpoint).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesWebsite URL or domain to plan fixes for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions scanning but doesn't specify side effects, resource usage, or whether scanning occurs anew. Output detail is good but behavioral context is lacking.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single long sentence packed with information, no wasted words. Could be slightly restructured for readability but remains efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Describes return values in detail but lacks output schema or behavioral guarantees. Missing safety/scope info given no annotations.

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% (one parameter 'url' with description). Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, earning baseline score.

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?

Clearly states it scans a site and returns a prioritized remediation plan with specific outputs (signals order, ASO points, artifact templates). Distinguishes from siblings like scan_site and get_aso_framework.

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?

Implies use when needing a fix plan after scanning, but no explicit when-to-use or comparison with sibling tools like check_signal or scan_site.

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