Skip to main content
Glama

ping

Test connectivity to the Codex MCP Server by sending a message and receiving an echo response to verify the server is operational.

Instructions

Test MCP server connection

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNoMessage to echo back

Implementation Reference

  • The handler implementation for the "ping" tool.
    export class PingToolHandler {
      async execute(args: unknown): Promise<ToolResult> {
        try {
          const { message = 'pong' }: PingToolArgs = PingToolSchema.parse(args);
    
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: 'text',
                text: message,
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          if (error instanceof ZodError) {
            throw new ValidationError(TOOLS.PING, error.message);
          }
          throw new ToolExecutionError(
  • Input schema definition for the "ping" tool.
    export const PingToolSchema = z.object({
      message: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • Registration of the PingToolHandler in the tools registry.
    [TOOLS.PING]: new PingToolHandler(),
  • Definition of the ping tool for the MCP server.
    name: 'ping',
    description: 'Test MCP server connection',
    arguments: [
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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool tests connection but doesn't describe what 'test' entails (e.g., whether it sends a request, checks latency, returns status codes), what happens on failure, or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter) and high schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., what 'test' means, response format) that would help the agent use it correctly, leaving room for improvement.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'message' documented as 'Message to echo back'. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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's purpose as testing MCP server connection, which is a specific action (test) on a specific resource (MCP server connection). However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'help' or 'listSessions', which might also involve server interaction, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and doesn't reference sibling tools. The agent must infer usage based on the name and description alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/tom-wahl/codex-mcp-server'

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