Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@curatedmcp/mcp

@curatedmcp/mcp

by oneprofile-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Get full details for one catalog server

get_mcp_server_details

Obtain a complete risk profile for any MCP server in the curated catalog, including risk level, declared capabilities, compatible clients, transport type, and install command.

Instructions

Fetch the full risk profile for a single MCP server in the CuratedMCP catalog: risk level, declared capabilities (file access, network egress, shell exec, etc.), compatible clients, transport type, and install command.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "get_mcp_server_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesThe server's slug or id, e.g. 'github-mcp' — get this from search_mcp_catalog

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses what data is returned but lacks details on side effects (none expected), permissions, or rate limits. Adequate for a simple fetch operation.

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?

Single well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, lists contents in a readable list, and has no filler or unnecessary words.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no nested objects), the description adequately lists return fields. Could mention read-only nature but is largely complete.

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% (one param slug described). The param description already explains slug source; the tool description adds a helpful cross-reference to the search tool, adding value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it fetches the full risk profile for a single MCP server, specifies exact contents (risk level, capabilities, etc.), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like search_mcp_catalog by focusing on a single item.

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 usage after search via the parameter note 'get this from search_mcp_catalog', but does not explicitly state when to use this versus check_mcp_server_verified or when not to use it.

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