Skip to main content
Glama
radeksh

shodan-mcp

by radeksh
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 'host' and 'search' tools have clearly distinct purposes: one retrieves details for a specific IP, the other performs general queries with filters. No overlap.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names are single lowercase verbs ('host', 'search') following a consistent simple pattern. No mixing of styles.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the set feels thin for a comprehensive Shodan interface. While it covers basic operations, more tools (e.g., count, DNS) would improve scope.

    Completeness3/5

    The tools cover core Shodan functionality (IP lookup and search), but missing common operations like count or streaming. A minor gap for a minimal server.

  • Average 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 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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    The description discloses that the 'raw' parameter returns full raw JSON instead of a pruned response, and specifies the return structure (total, matches, facets). No annotations exist, but the description adequately covers key behavioral aspects for a search tool (likely read-only).

    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?

    The description is well-structured with a clear opening and a parameter list. It is lengthy due to the number of parameters, but each sentence serves a purpose. Could be slightly more concise by grouping similar parameters.

    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 high parameter count (24) and lack of annotations, the description covers all parameters and includes return format details. It lacks examples or edge cases but is sufficient for basic usage.

    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 description adds meaning to each parameter by explaining its filter role and expected format (e.g., 'country: kod ISO'). With 0% schema coverage, this is essential. While terse, it covers all 24 parameters and clarifies usage beyond the schema.

    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 clearly states the tool searches Shodan and combines a free query with optional dork filters. It indicates the tool's purpose as a search interface. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'host', which likely serves a different purpose (e.g., host details).

    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 explains when to use the 'query' parameter (can be empty if filters provided) and lists all optional filters. It implies usage for searching Shodan but does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over 'host' or what scenarios to avoid.

    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?

    With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the effect of each parameter (history, minify, raw) and describes the return format (dict with fields like org, isp, asn, etc.). It does not mention rate limits or error conditions, but overall provides good transparency.

    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?

    The description is reasonably concise, consisting of two paragraphs: a clear purpose statement followed by a parameter list. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, but could be slightly tighter by removing redundant phrasing.

    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 that an output schema exists (context signal), the description does not need to fully detail return values, but it still lists key fields. Parameters are explained completely. Missing error handling or example calls, but overall complete for a simple lookup tool.

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

    Parameters5/5

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

    Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains all four parameters: ip (address to check), history (full history), minify (truncated data), and raw (full JSON). This adds significant value beyond the bare 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?

    Description clearly states it returns detailed information about an IP address from the Shodan database ('Zwraca szczegółowe informacje o adresie IP z bazy Shodan'). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'search' tool, which likely returns a list of IPs.

    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 for looking up a specific IP, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling 'search' tool or provide exclusions. Context is clear but lacks explicit guidance on alternatives.

    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

shodan-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

shodan-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/radeksh/shodan-mcp'

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