Skip to main content
Glama
imprvhub

Status Observer MCP

by imprvhub
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

67%
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 ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool 'status' has a clear, distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare it against for patterns or conventions. The name 'status' is straightforward and follows a simple noun-based pattern.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is too few for a server named 'Status Observer MCP', which implies monitoring multiple platforms or aspects. This minimal set feels thin and underdeveloped for the apparent scope of observing status across major digital platforms.

    Completeness2/5

    The tool surface is severely incomplete for a status observer domain. It only provides a generic status check without tools for listing platforms, setting alerts, retrieving historical data, or handling specific platform types, leading to significant gaps in functionality.

  • Average 3.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • 1 of 1 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 7 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under Mozilla Public License 2.0.

  • 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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Check operational status' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, rate limits, what the output format looks like, or any side effects. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient behavioral context.

    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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

    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?

    Given the tool has no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, output, or usage context. For a status-checking tool, this leaves gaps in understanding how to interpret results.

    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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents the single 'command' parameter. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain what 'list', '--all', or platform checks like '--github' actually do or return). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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

    Purpose4/5

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

    The description clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Check operational status of major digital platforms', which is a specific verb ('Check') + resource ('operational status of major digital platforms'). It's not tautological with the name 'status', and there are no sibling tools to differentiate from, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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

    Usage Guidelines2/5

    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 versus alternatives, prerequisites, or contextual constraints. It simply states what the tool does without any usage instructions. With no sibling tools, this is less critical but still a gap in 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-status-observer MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

mcp-status-observer 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/imprvhub/mcp-status-observer'

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