Skip to main content
Glama
wylu1037
by wylu1037

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v0.1.5

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no ambiguity or confusion with other tools.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The single tool name 'create_tweet' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, consistent with itself.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool for a Twitter-oriented server is insufficient; typical interacton with tweets requires multiple operations (read, delete, etc.), making this feel thin.

    Completeness2/5

    Only creation is covered; essential operations like reading, deleting, or listing tweets are missing, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

  • Average 2.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 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 passing
  • This repository is licensed under Apache 2.0.

  • 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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral transparency. 'Create a tweet' implies mutation but offers no details about rate limits, authentication requirements, or any constraints (e.g., character limits), leaving significant behavioral traits undisclosed.

    Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

    Conciseness2/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    The description is extremely short (3 words), which is concise but at the expense of essential information. It is under-specified, lacking structure or any front-loading of key details, making it insufficient for effective tool selection.

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

    Completeness2/5

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

    Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), a complete description should at least clarify the nature of the 'text' parameter (e.g., tweet content, character limits). The current description is incomplete, leaving the agent without necessary context to use the tool correctly.

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

    Parameters1/5

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

    The input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'text' parameter, and the tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema. The agent has no information about what 'text' should contain (e.g., tweet content, formatting, length constraints), rendering the parameter semantics entirely dependent on inference.

    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 'Create a tweet' clearly states the verb and resource, making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it is minimal and does not differentiate from any potential siblings, but since no siblings exist, it is adequate.

    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 or any alternatives. There are no sibling tools, but the lack of context (e.g., prerequisites, typical use cases) means the agent has no additional decision support.

    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

mcp_x_server MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

mcp_x_server 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/wylu1037/mcp_x_server'

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