Skip to main content
Glama

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have completely distinct purposes—one retrieves metadata, the other downloads content—with no overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (download_video, get_video_info), making them predictable and easy to distinguish.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the set is minimal but sufficient for its core purpose of retrieving video info and downloading. A few more utility tools might enhance coverage, but the count is reasonable for a focused wrapper.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover the two primary actions (metadata retrieval and download) but lack features like format selection or playlist handling (only via flag). Gaps are minor given the scope.

  • Average 4.4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 1 commit 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, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. Description adds specific return fields, confirms no download, and notes playlist behavior. No contradiction.

    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, front-loaded with core purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

    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?

    Despite no output schema, description lists key return fields. Covers playlist edge case. Adequate for a simple lookup tool with one parameter.

    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 clear description for the single url parameter. Description adds minimal extra beyond the schema's example 'e.g. a YouTube link'. 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?

    Clear verb (look up metadata) and resource (video URL). Explicitly states it does not download, distinguishing from sibling download_video. Mentions support for YouTube and hundreds of other sites via yt-dlp.

    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?

    Implies use for metadata inspection without downloading, and notes limitation for playlists (only first video). Does not explicitly say when not to use or name alternatives, but sibling tool name provides contrast.

    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?

    Describes download destination ('Saves into ~/Downloads by default'), playlist refusal to avoid accidental full downloads, and required external tool. Adds context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).

    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?

    Four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: action and scope, default location, safety behavior, dependency. No redundant or vague statements.

    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?

    Covers core behavior, defaults, playlist safeguard, and external dependency. No output schema needed; description is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

    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 100% (baseline 3). Description adds context for allow_playlist (refusal unless set) and output_dir (default ~/Downloads). Enhances understanding of parameter behavior beyond schema.

    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?

    Clearly states verb 'Download', resource 'video from a URL', and scope 'YouTube and hundreds of other sites via yt-dlp'. Distinguishes from sibling 'get_video_info' which retrieves info only.

    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 guidance on playlist handling ('Refuses playlist URLs unless allow_playlist is set') and dependency ('yt-dlp must be installed separately and reachable on PATH'). Implicitly differentiates from sibling by action (download vs info).

    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

yt-dlp-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

yt-dlp-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/kingithegreat/yt-dlp-mcp'

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