Skip to main content
Glama

Server Quality Checklist

92%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v0.27.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are completely distinct: demo_orders returns a JSON array of records, while demo_logs returns plain-text log lines. Their purposes—showing structured vs. text output—are clearly separated, leaving no ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow the same `demo_<plural noun>` pattern, using consistent lowercase snake_case and a common prefix. The naming is predictable and coherent, even though it deviates from a strict verb_noun style.

    Tool Count4/5

    At just two tools, the server is slightly below the typical 3-15 range, but the count is deliberate: one tool for each of terse's two data tiers. This makes the set well-scoped for its demo purpose.

    Completeness5/5

    The server's stated domain is demonstrating terse's handling of record-shaped vs. text-shaped results, and these two tools cover exactly that distinction. There are no missing operations or dead ends for the intended scope.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

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

    • 2 of 2 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 201 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 MIT 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.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • This server has been verified by its author.

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?

    The description discloses that the tool is synthetic and side-effect-free ('Nothing is fetched and nothing is stored'), which is important behavioral context given no annotations. However, it does not mention determinism, randomness, or other potential behavioral nuances, but for a simple demo tool this is sufficient.

    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 core purpose, and each sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

    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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the return type (JSON record array), synthetic status, and the demo purpose. It could still mention whether results are random or ordered, but the current level is sufficient for this low-complexity tool.

    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 coverage is 100% for the single 'limit' parameter, which has its own min, max, default, and description. The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

    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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return a synthetic order book as a JSON record array.' It clearly distinguishes this from the sibling tool demo_logs by stating it returns an order book, not logs. The phrase 'Nothing is fetched and nothing is stored' further clarifies its role as a synthetic demo.

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

    Usage Guidelines3/5

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

    The description implies the tool is for viewing the shape of a record-style result ('so you can see what terse does to a record-shaped tool result'). It provides context for when to use it but does not explicitly compare with demo_logs or state when not to use it.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the output is synthetic, plain-text, non-JSON, and a log tail, which conveys the nature and purpose. It does not mention side effects or permissions, but as a demo read-only tool, this is sufficient context. The description adds value beyond the bare schema.

    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 core action, and every word earns its place. It efficiently contrasts with the sibling tool without unnecessary detail.

    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?

    This is a simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description sufficiently explains the return format (plain-text log tail), the synthetic nature, and the difference from demo_orders, making it complete for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

    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 coverage is 100%: the single parameter 'lines' is fully described in the input schema, including default, range, and semantics. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, but since the schema already fully explains it, a baseline score of 3 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 uses the specific verb 'Return' with the resource 'synthetic plain-text log tail', clearly stating what the tool does. It explicitly contrasts with demo_orders by noting the non-JSON format and the distinct audience ('terse's text tier'), distinguishing it from its sibling.

    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 gives clear usage context by contrasting with demo_orders: it returns plain-text logs, whereas demo_orders returns a record array. This implies when to use this tool (for text log output) versus the alternative, though it does not explicitly state 'use this when...' or exclude other cases.

    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

terse MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

terse 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/inth3shadows/terse'

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