Skip to main content
Glama

check_config

Validates ChiliPiper MCP configuration by displaying current settings and testing API connectivity.

Instructions

Validate ChiliPiper MCP configuration. Shows current settings and tests API connectivity.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'check_config' tool. It displays current configuration (domain, api_key, base_url, fire_url) and tests API connectivity by sending an OPTIONS request.
    async () => {
      const config = {
        domain: DOMAIN || "(not set)",
        api_key: API_KEY ? `${API_KEY.substring(0, 8)}...` : "(not set)",
        base_url: BASE_URL,
        fire_url: FIRE_URL,
      };
    
      let connectivity = "untested";
      try {
        const res = await fetch(
          `${BASE_URL}/marketing/${DOMAIN || "test"}`,
          { method: "OPTIONS" }
        );
        connectivity = `reachable (HTTP ${res.status})`;
      } catch (err) {
        connectivity = `unreachable: ${err.message}`;
      }
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `ChiliPiper MCP Config:\n${JSON.stringify(config, null, 2)}\n\nConnectivity: ${connectivity}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • index.js:207-240 (registration)
    Registration of the 'check_config' tool on the MCP server via server.tool(), with the name, description, empty schema, and handler.
    // --- Tool: Check config ---
    server.tool(
      "check_config",
      "Validate ChiliPiper MCP configuration. Shows current settings and tests API connectivity.",
      {},
      async () => {
        const config = {
          domain: DOMAIN || "(not set)",
          api_key: API_KEY ? `${API_KEY.substring(0, 8)}...` : "(not set)",
          base_url: BASE_URL,
          fire_url: FIRE_URL,
        };
    
        let connectivity = "untested";
        try {
          const res = await fetch(
            `${BASE_URL}/marketing/${DOMAIN || "test"}`,
            { method: "OPTIONS" }
          );
          connectivity = `reachable (HTTP ${res.status})`;
        } catch (err) {
          connectivity = `unreachable: ${err.message}`;
        }
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `ChiliPiper MCP Config:\n${JSON.stringify(config, null, 2)}\n\nConnectivity: ${connectivity}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
  • Input schema for check_config is an empty object {}, meaning this tool accepts no parameters.
    {},
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool is non-destructive (validate, show, test) but does not detail behaviors like error handling or output format. Given that it likely has no side effects, the description is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every word adds value. No unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a simple config validation tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It could mention that it is safe to run multiple times, but not essential.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description adds context by explaining what the tool does with the config, which is sufficient. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 that the tool validates configuration and tests API connectivity. It uses specific verbs ('Validate', 'Shows', 'tests') and identifies the resource ('ChiliPiper MCP configuration'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_booking_link, which are focused on different operations.

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 implies the tool is for initial setup verification or debugging, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. However, the context of siblings (booking/routing) suggests it is a configuration check, and the purpose is distinct enough that an agent can infer appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

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/hyypeman/chilipiper-mcp'

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