Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
toolmenu

toolmenu

by niksa90
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

check_auth

Read-only

Diagnose OAuth discovery for an HTTP MCP server without login: inspect 401/WWW-Authenticate, resource and auth-server metadata, PKCE, and registration when clients cannot sign in.

Instructions

Check an HTTP MCP server's OAuth discovery the way a client that follows the spec walks it, without logging in: the 401 and its WWW-Authenticate, the protected resource metadata, the authorization server's metadata, PKCE and registration. Use it when a server answers 401 or a client cannot sign in. Sends unauthenticated requests to the URL and to the metadata addresses it names; no credentials, no tokens.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "check_auth"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe Streamable HTTP endpoint: https://mcp.example.com/mcp.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.27.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, it discloses that requests are unauthenticated, that no credentials or tokens are sent, and — importantly — that requests go not just to the given URL but also to 'the metadata addresses it names', which is non-obvious outbound behavior. It does not describe the shape of the report returned, leaving that gap for a tool with no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the when-to-use and side-effect disclosures following logically. The colon-delimited spec walk is dense but each item is meaningful; only minor trimming would be possible.

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 one-parameter, read-only diagnostic with no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger, and side effects well, and it implies the report contents by listing the steps checked. A brief note on what the returned report contains would close the remaining gap.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single `url` parameter is already documented as the Streamable HTTP endpoint with an example. The description adds no format, validation, or edge-case guidance beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Check an HTTP MCP server's OAuth discovery') and immediately enumerates the concrete artifacts inspected (401/WWW-Authenticate, protected resource metadata, AS metadata, PKCE, registration). That is far more specific than the bare tool name, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings like check_session.

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?

'Use it when a server answers 401 or a client cannot sign in' gives a clear triggering condition an agent can match against an observed failure. It stops short of exclusions or naming an alternative diagnostic tool to try first, so it lands just under the top mark.

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