Skip to main content
Glama
mateogon

download-books-mcp

by mateogon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

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 have clearly distinct purposes: one searches for books and returns metadata with IDs, the other downloads a specific book by ID. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: search_books and download_book. The slight singular/plural difference is natural and does not create inconsistency.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only 2 tools, the server is on the thin side, but given its narrow purpose of searching and downloading books, this count is appropriate and each tool clearly earns its place.

    Completeness5/5

    The server covers the essential workflow for its domain: discover books via search, then download via ID. This forms a complete user journey with no dead ends or obvious missing operations.

  • Average 3.6/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 3 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?

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It discloses that results are 'clean' and include an id for download, but it does not mention provider behavior, limits, error handling, or filtering semantics. This is adequate but minimal.

    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?

    Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with no wasted words. Each sentence adds value: the first states what the tool does, the second states the output's purpose.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness2/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    With seven parameters, no annotations, and no schema descriptions, the description leaves too much unstated. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to document return shape, but the lack of parameter semantics and behavioral caveats makes the overall definition incomplete for an agent to invoke confidently.

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters1/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation for any of the seven parameters. While parameter names like 'query' and 'limit' are somewhat self-explanatory, 'search_type', 'provider_name', 'preferred_author', and 'preferred_language' lack any semantic guidance. The description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

    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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('book metadata'), and clearly states the output's purpose ('id for download_book'), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool. It is immediately clear what the tool does.

    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?

    The description implies a clear usage context: search for book metadata to obtain an id, then use that id with download_book. It does not give explicit exclusions or alternative conditions, but the workflow context is evident.

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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Download', which implies a side-effect operation, but does not disclose where the book is saved, whether library_dir_path is required for that, what happens on failure, or any other behavioral details. This is a significant transparency gap for an action that likely writes files.

    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?

    A single, direct sentence that front-loads the verb and object and contains no filler. Every word earns its place by clarifying the source of the id.

    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?

    For a two-parameter tool, the essential workflow is conveyed: use an id from search_books. However, the optional library_dir_path parameter is left unexplained, and with no annotations there is no guidance on side effects or postconditions. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to document return values, but the behavioral gap keeps this from being fully complete.

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters2/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    The description adds meaning to 'id' by stating it comes from a search_books result, which helps an agent understand its origin and type. However, library_dir_path is entirely undocumented—neither the schema nor the description explains what it controls (presumably the save directory). With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to compensate and only partially did.

    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 states a specific verb ('Download'), a resource ('a book selected by its id'), and the source of that id ('from a previous search_books result'). This clearly distinguishes download_book from its sibling search_books: one searches, the other downloads.

    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?

    The phrase 'from a previous search_books result' explicitly positions this tool as the follow-up step after a search, giving clear context for when to use it. It does not provide explicit exclusions, but the intended sequence is evident enough to guide an agent correctly.

    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

download-books-mcp MCP server – quality and maintenance score on Glama

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

download-books-mcp MCP server – quality and maintenance score on Glama

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/mateogon/download-books-mcp'

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