rfc-server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| XBY_APIKEY | Yes | 你的实际apikey (Your actual API key) |
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
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_rfcC | Fetch an RFC document by its number |
| search_rfcsC | Search for RFCs by keyword |
| get_rfc_sectionC | Get a specific section from an RFC |
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 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_rfc retrieves entire documents, get_rfc_section extracts specific sections, and search_rfcs finds documents by keyword. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making it easy for an agent to select the right tool.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (get_rfc, get_rfc_section, search_rfcs). The naming is predictable and readable, using clear verbs like 'get' and 'search' that accurately describe the actions.
Three tools are reasonable for an RFC-focused server, covering core operations of fetching, sectioning, and searching. It is slightly lean but well-scoped; adding tools like list_rfcs or filter by date could enhance it, but the current set is functional.
The toolset covers essential RFC operations: retrieval, section access, and search. Minor gaps exist, such as no listing or filtering capabilities (e.g., by status or date), but agents can work around this using search. For the domain, it provides a solid foundation without dead ends.