Skip to main content
Glama
wyre-technology

ironscales-mcp

Server Quality Checklist

75%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v1.2.2

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one navigates to specific domains to view their tools, and the other checks API connection status. No ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Both tools share the consistent 'ironscales_' prefix and use snake_case. However, one is a verb ('navigate') and the other is a noun ('status'), which is a minor inconsistency.

    Tool Count2/5

    With only 2 tools for a server that claims to cover multiple domains (incidents, email, remediation, stats, allowlist), the count is far too low to be useful.

    Completeness1/5

    The server lacks any tools for actual operations on the listed domains, such as viewing incidents, classifying emails, or managing remediation. It only has navigation and status checks, leaving massive gaps.

  • 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
    • 17 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • 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.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • 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 fully convey behavioral traits. It states the tool checks status (a read operation), but omits any details about authentication, rate limits, or side effects. The minimal description leaves the agent with limited understanding of 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 sentence with 8 words, conveying the essential purpose without any extraneous information. It is optimally concise and front-loaded.

    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?

    The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain the return value format to enable the agent to interpret results. It does not mention what the status response contains or how domains are listed, leaving a significant information gap for a simple tool.

    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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). Per the guidelines, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4. The description adds full context for what the tool does, compensating for the lack of schema complexity.

    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 uses a specific verb 'Check' and clearly identifies the resource 'Ironscales API connection status and available domains'. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'ironscales_navigate' by focusing on status rather than navigation.

    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 checking API connectivity and domains, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or specific context for invocation.

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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations provided, so the description must do more. It implies a non-destructive read operation ('see its available tools'), but does not confirm no side effects or specify behavior beyond navigation. Slightly vague.

    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?

    Two sentences with a clear list. Every sentence is necessary and no redundancy. Extremely concise and well-structured.

    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?

    For a simple navigation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It lists all domains with brief explanations, and no additional context is needed for correct usage.

    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?

    The description adds significant meaning to the 'domain' parameter by explaining each enum value (e.g., 'incidents (phishing incidents)'), which goes beyond the schema's simple description. Schema coverage is 100% but description enhances clarity.

    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 'Navigate to a domain to see its available tools,' uses a specific verb and resource, and lists all valid domains. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'ironscales_status' which likely checks status.

    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?

    Provides explicit guidance on when to use (to see tools for a specific domain) and enumerates valid domains. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, though the context is clear.

    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

ironscales-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

ironscales-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/wyre-technology/ironscales-mcp'

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