Skip to main content
Glama
ukanwat

@damusix/buffer-mcp

by ukanwat
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.2.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one provides help/schema info, the other executes API actions. No overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Both follow a 'buffer_api_<verb>' snake_case pattern, but one uses 'help' and the other 'use', which is slightly asymmetric. Still mostly consistent.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels minimal. While the use_buffer_api tool consolidates many actions, the small count may limit expressiveness for agents.

    Completeness4/5

    The use_buffer_api tool claims to cover all major Buffer API actions (list, create, delete), and the help tool provides schema for new actions. Minor gap: no dedicated tool for individual action exploration beyond help.

  • Average 4.1/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 2 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is failing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • 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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions create/delete actions, implying mutability, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. Some behavioral context is given but insufficient for full 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 a single sentence with examples, making it efficient and front-loaded. No wasted words, though it could be more structured by separating action listing from payload guidance.

    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?

    The tool has 2 parameters, one required, and nested objects. No output schema exists. The description lists some actions but not exhaustively, and relies on a sibling tool for complete field details. This is adequate but not fully self-contained for all usage scenarios.

    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 coverage is 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description adds value by listing action examples (listPosts, createPost) and directing to buffer_api_help for payload details. However, it does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides, fitting the baseline.

    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 the verb 'Execute' and the resource 'Buffer API action', listing concrete examples (list organizations, channels, posts, create/delete posts, create ideas). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'buffer_api_help', which likely provides help on available actions.

    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 gives a hint by mentioning 'Use buffer_api_help to see available fields' for the payload, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No preconditions or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

    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?

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly indicates the tool returns help/schema info and does not perform actions, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or has no side effects, though this is inherent for a help tool.

    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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. It efficiently conveys the core functionality in an easily digestible format.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness5/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers both usage modes and provides sufficient context for an agent to understand its purpose and invocation.

    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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the behavior when action is omitted (see all actions) and that category filters by query/mutation. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

    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 the tool provides help on Buffer API actions, with two modes: listing all actions or getting detailed schema for a specific action. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool use_buffer_api which executes actions.

    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 implicitly guides when to use this tool (for exploring available actions and obtaining details) versus the sibling tool, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative conditions. The context of sibling tools helps but is not explicitly stated.

    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

buffer-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

buffer-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/ukanwat/buffer-mcp'

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