Skip to main content
Glama
kristian-schmidt-scf

yt-summarizer

by kristian-schmidt-scf
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are completely distinct: one fetches a transcript and the other creates a Notion page. There is no overlap or chance of misselection.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a clear verb_noun naming pattern: get_transcript and create_notion_page. The style is consistent and predictable.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only two tools, the server feels minimal for its stated purpose as a summarizer. Two is borderline, not excessive, but the scope suggests more tools would be expected.

    Completeness1/5

    The server name implies summarization, but no summarization tool exists. It only retrieves transcripts and creates Notion pages, leaving the core summarization functionality completely absent.

  • Average 3.8/5 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

  • 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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It does not mention what the transcript contains (e.g., auto-generated vs manual), whether authentication is required, any rate limits, or what happens if the video ID is invalid. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

    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 extremely concise, with two short sentences that deliver the core purpose and parameter details without filler. It is front-loaded with the main action.

    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?

    Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential info about accepted input formats. However, it lacks guidance on when to use the tool and does not describe the transcript output structure or any error cases, leaving some gaps for a production tool.

    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?

    The schema provides only 'video_id' as a string, but the description adds crucial clarity by specifying accepted formats: 'A YouTube video ID or full video URL (watch, youtu.be, shorts, etc.)'. This directly compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

    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 'Fetch the transcript of a YouTube video', using a specific verb and resource. It is easily distinguished from the sibling tool create_notion_page, which serves a completely different purpose.

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

    Usage Guidelines2/5

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

    No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There are no mentions of prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where another tool might be preferred. The description only gives argument instructions.

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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    With no annotations, the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses a useful behavior: 'The parent page ID is injected automatically from PARENT_PAGE_ID.' However, it does not mention permissions, error conditions, or the fact that it is a write operation beyond the name itself, leaving some gaps.

    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 tightly written with a single opening sentence and an 'Args' section. It avoids redundancy and front-loads the core function, making it easy to scan and understand.

    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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers essential details: the payload type, the automatic parent injection, and the overall purpose. It lacks explicit usage guidance, but the simplicity of the tool and presence of an output schema make this less critical.

    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?

    The schema provides no description for the parameter, and schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explaining that 'notion_page_content' is a Notion 'create page' API payload with 'properties + children blocks' and that the parent ID is auto-injected. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema definition.

    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: 'Create a new Notion page under the configured parent page.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the sibling tool 'get_transcript' contrasts as a read operation, making the purpose distinct.

    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 usage by stating the action, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The parent page injection is noted, but there is no directive like 'use this when you need to add a page.'

    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-summarizer MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

yt-summarizer 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/kristian-schmidt-scf/yt-summarizer'

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