link-mcp-server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| link_healthB | Health check for link MCP server runtime. |
| analyze_link_for_frontendC | Analyze a public link (like Axure) for frontend development. Returns a screenshot and a frontend-focused markdown analysis. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools serve entirely different purposes: one is a runtime health check and the other performs link analysis. There is no overlap or ambiguity in what each tool does.
Both names use snake_case, but they follow different grammatical patterns: 'link_health' is a noun phrase with a prefix, while 'analyze_link_for_frontend' is a verb phrase with a preposition. The inconsistency is noticeable but still readable.
Two tools is thin for a server, especially since only one provides the core functionality. The health check is useful but meta, leaving a very narrow actionable surface.
For a link analysis server, the single analyze tool covers the primary use case, but there are no operations for listing past analyses, batch processing, or validating links. The surface feels incomplete for broader link-related workflows.