Skip to main content
Glama
jacwalste

VendorOps MCP

by jacwalste

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only a single tool, there are no overlapping purposes or ambiguity. The tool clearly defines its own scope.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The single tool name follows a clear verb_noun pattern (search_vendors), which is consistent and predictable.

    Tool Count2/5

    The server name VendorOps implies broader vendor management, but only one search tool is provided. This is too few for the apparent scope, leaving the toolset feeling thin.

    Completeness1/5

    The toolset covers only searching vendors, with no create, update, delete, or other lifecycle operations. This is a severe gap for a vendor operations server.

  • Average 4.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 4 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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    The description adds important behavioral context: the query is a substring match across name/category/owner, while category and status are exact filters. However, without annotations, it does not disclose behaviors such as pagination, result limits, or behavior when no query is provided (e.g., returns all vendors). These gaps make it adequate but not fully transparent.

    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 concise and front-loaded: two short sentences that immediately convey the core functionality and the optional filters. There is no redundant or filler content.

    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?

    The description covers the main search and filter features, and an output schema exists, so return values are documented. However, it does not explain how query and filters combine (AND vs OR), nor the behavior when the query is omitted. These are important for effective invocation, leaving a clear gap.

    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?

    Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the semantics of the 'query' parameter (substring across fields), and the 'category' and 'status' parameters (exact filters). The 'limit' parameter is not mentioned, but its schema provides min/max/default, so the description adds value for the ambiguous parameters.

    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's function: 'Search vendor records by a name, category, or owner substring.' It specifies the resource (vendor records), the actions (substring search and optional exact filters), and gives enough detail to distinguish it from a generic search tool.

    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?

    No sibling tools are listed, so explicit alternatives are not applicable. The description provides clear context on when to use the tool (searching vendors with substring or exact filters) and implies that filtering is optional. There are no exclusions or when-not guidance, but the purpose is clear enough for a standalone tool.

    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

vendorops-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

vendorops-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/jacwalste/vendorops-mcp'

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