Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
PCCheck MCP Server

PCCheck MCP Server

by jjackk0k
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Internet speed test

speed_test
Read-only

Measure actual download speed in Mbps and time-to-first-byte using Cloudflare's public endpoint. Diagnose if your internet speed matches what you pay for.

Instructions

Measure actual download speed in Mbps (plus time-to-first-byte). Use when the user asks 'how fast is my internet' or says speeds don't match what they pay for. Downloads throwaway test data from Cloudflare's public speed endpoint — nothing is uploaded. Takes ~8-10 seconds. For connection problems (drops, lag, 'wifi vs ISP'), use network_check instead.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "speed_test"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
secondsNoTest duration (default 8)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds that it downloads throwaway data from Cloudflare, nothing uploaded, and takes ~8-10 seconds, which goes beyond annotations and is accurate.

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?

Three sentences with clear front-loading: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage scenarios, third adds caveats. No wasted words.

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?

Lacks output schema, and the description does not specify return format or possible errors. For a simple tool it is adequate but could mention what the result looks like (e.g., object with download speed and TTFB). Otherwise fine.

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% with a well-described parameter. The description mentions duration implicitly (takes ~8-10 seconds) but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool measures download speed in Mbps and time-to-first-byte. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the sibling network_check tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to use (user asks about internet speed or speed mismatch) and when not (connection problems, with alternative tool named). No ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools