Skip to main content
Glama
gbti-network

Super Secret MCP Server

by gbti-network
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript

Server Quality Checklist

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

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is singular and clearly defined, so disambiguation is perfect.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The naming follows a clear verb_noun pattern (getSecretPassphrase).

    Tool Count2/5

    One tool is too few for most server purposes, as it severely limits functionality and scope. This feels thin and incomplete, even for a simple server, unless it's intentionally minimalistic.

    Completeness1/5

    The server's purpose is unclear from the single tool, but a 'secret passphrase' domain would typically require more operations (e.g., set, update, list, delete). With only a get operation, the surface is severely incomplete and will likely cause agent failures.

  • Average 1.8/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 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

  • This repository is licensed under ISC License.

  • 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

  • Behavior1/5

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

    The description provides no behavioral information beyond the implied retrieval action. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to mention anything about authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, error conditions, or what format the password is returned in. It doesn't even clarify if this retrieves a specific password or prompts for one.

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

    Conciseness2/5

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

    While technically concise with just three words, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description doesn't earn its place - it provides almost no useful information. Good conciseness balances brevity with information density, which this description completely fails to achieve.

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

    Completeness1/5

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

    For a tool that presumably retrieves sensitive authentication information, the description is completely inadequate. With no annotations, no output schema, and a tool name suggesting security implications, the description should provide critical context about what's being retrieved, security considerations, and usage constraints. Instead, it offers virtually no useful information.

    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 has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema), so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to compensate for any parameter documentation gaps. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there's nothing for the description to add regarding parameters.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose2/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description 'Whats the password?' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'getSecretPassphrase' in question form. It doesn't specify what resource or system this password belongs to, what format the password is in, or what the tool actually does beyond the obvious implication of retrieving something. While it implies retrieval of a password, it lacks specificity about what kind of password or from where.

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

    Usage Guidelines1/5

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

    The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, what context it applies to, what prerequisites might be needed, or any alternatives. It's a simple question with no usage context whatsoever. With no sibling tools mentioned, there's no need to distinguish from alternatives, but the description still fails to provide any usage guidance.

    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

mcp-whats-the-passphrase MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

mcp-whats-the-passphrase 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/gbti-network/mcp-whats-the-passphrase'

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