Skip to main content
Glama
gauravamar-blip

Tranna MCP

by gauravamar-blip
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly stated as a status check.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The single tool name 'tranna_get_service_status' follows a clear verb_noun pattern in snake_case, making it descriptive and internally consistent, though there are no other tools to compare.

    Tool Count1/5

    A single status-check tool is far too few to constitute a substantive MCP server, feeling like a placeholder or stub rather than a useful collection.

    Completeness1/5

    The tool only returns status information and explicitly accesses no platform data, leaving no operations for actual work, which is severely incomplete for any practical use.

  • Average 4.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 5 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • 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 read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context by explicitly noting 'No platform data is accessed' and mentioning 'authentication placeholder status,' which informs the user that authentication is not fully implemented. This goes beyond the annotation metadata.

    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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose ('Returns statuses') and appends a clarifying note about data access. There is no redundant wording or filler, making it highly efficient.

    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?

    This is a low-complexity tool with no parameters, no output schema, and no siblings. The description sufficiently outlines the return categories and clarifies the tool's non-data-access behavior. Though the output format is not detailed, the lack of an output schema is mitigated by the clear enumeration of what statuses are returned.

    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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description compensates by specifying the key categories of the return value (runtime readiness, auth status, connector statuses), which gives the user a clear idea of what the tool reports. Baseline for zero params is 4.

    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 returns server runtime readiness, authentication placeholder status, and registered connector statuses. The verb 'Returns' specifies an action, the resource is well-defined, and the final sentence 'No platform data is accessed' clarifies the scope, distinguishing this from data-access tools even without siblings.

    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 provides clear context: it is a service status/health check tool with no parameters. Since there are no sibling tools, it does not need to differentiate alternatives, but it implicitly signals when to use it (to check MCP service status). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but given the tool's simplicity, the absence of exclusions is acceptable.

    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

tranna_mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

tranna_mcp 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/gauravamar-blip/tranna_mcp'

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