Skip to main content
Glama
keenableai

Keenable MCP Server

Official
by keenableai
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.2.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one fetches content from a given URL, the other searches the web. No ambiguity in their roles.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (fetch_page_content, search_web_pages), making them predictable and easy to understand.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server is very minimal for a web research domain. While the pair covers a basic workflow, it feels thin compared to typical expectations.

    Completeness3/5

    The server offers search and content extraction, which forms a minimal complete workflow. However, missing features like pagination, history, or element extraction leave notable gaps.

  • Average 4.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 37 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • 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.

  • 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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, indicating safe, idempotent, read-only behavior. The description adds the output format (markdown) and implies fetching a page. No contradiction; the description adds useful context beyond annotations.

    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 very concise, consisting of two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key information: the action and the resource.

    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?

    Given the tool's simplicity, strong annotations, and well-documented schema (100% coverage), the description is complete. It covers the core functionality, output format, and the schema covers parameters. No output schema is needed; the description suffices.

    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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; it only mentions the output format, which is not parameter-specific. Thus, the description adds no extra value for parameter understanding.

    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 verb 'Fetch and extract' and the resource 'web page', and specifies the output format 'markdown'. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'search_web_pages', which implies searching rather than fetching a specific URL.

    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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'search_web_pages'. The distinction is implied by the name and description, but there is no 'when-not' or alternative mention, leaving room for ambiguity.

    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?

    Annotations already readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds behavioral traits: returns snippets, supports two modes (pro/realtime), and provides query tips. No contradiction with annotations.

    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?

    Approximately 100 words, well-structured with clear paragraphs for purpose, tips, and filtering/modes. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

    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?

    Given 7 parameters, 1 required, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description covers usage tips, parameter explanations, and modes. Lacks details on result structure (only mentions 'snippets') but is otherwise comprehensive.

    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?

    With 100% schema description coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds significant value beyond schema by explaining query strategy (semantic descriptions), purpose of filters, and mode selection, enriching understanding.

    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 it is a web search tool for current events and recent data, distinguishes from sibling 'fetch_page_content' by positioning itself as the default search tool, and specifies that it returns snippets.

    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?

    Provides explicit guidance on when to use (current events, data beyond cutoff), query tips (describe ideal page, not keywords), and how to narrow results using date and site filters and two modes. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but is otherwise clear.

    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

keenable-mcp-ts MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

keenable-mcp-ts 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/keenableai/keenable-mcp-ts'

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