Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ASO Score MCP

ASO Score MCP

Official
by forgemeshlabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List all agent-readiness checks

list_checks

List the full catalog of ASO checks (IDs, names, categories, descriptions, spec links) to discover valid check IDs, build UI filters, or understand scanner coverage before running a scan.

Instructions

List the full catalog of supported ASO checks with id, name, category, description, and spec link. Use this before check_signal to discover valid check ids, to build UI filters, or to explain the scanner coverage; it does not scan a site or produce a score.

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": "list_checks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses that the tool is a read-only catalog listing with no side effects. No annotations exist, so description fully carries the burden and does so transparently.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action and output fields. Every sentence adds value—no wasted words.

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?

Complete for a parameterless listing tool: describes output, use cases, and boundaries. No output schema needed given simplicity.

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?

No parameters; schema coverage is trivially 100%. Baseline of 4 is appropriate as description adds no parameter info beyond what schema already conveys.

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?

Clear verb 'list' with specific resource 'full catalog of supported ASO checks' and fields (id, name, category, description, spec link). Distinguishes from siblings by stating it does not scan or produce a score.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: before check_signal to discover valid check ids, to build UI filters, or to explain scanner coverage. Also states what it does not do (scan or score), providing clear guidance.

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