Skip to main content
Glama
yuchen814

npm-registry-mcp-server

by yuchen814
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

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

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct primary purposes: fetching metadata for a package (or specific version) versus listing available versions and dist-tags. While get_npm_package_metadata with allVersions can also return version information, the descriptions make the intended use of each tool unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case: get_npm_package_metadata and list_npm_package_versions. The verbs 'get' and 'list' are appropriate for their respective operations, and the naming is predictable and uniform.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels slightly thin for an npm registry surface, as it could reasonably include operations like search or package file downloads. However, the narrow read-only metadata focus makes this count defensible and not excessive.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the core read-only operations for npm package metadata: retrieving metadata (with version, tag, or range options) and listing available versions. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct search or readme retrieval, but these are not essential for the stated purpose of querying package information.

  • Average 4.3/5 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 status not available

  • 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?

    Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'newest first' and the inclusion of dist-tags, which are useful behavioral details, but does not disclose potential edge cases (e.g., registryUrl behavior, error conditions). This matches the baseline for a well-annotated read-only 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?

    Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause carries meaning. There is no redundancy or filler.

    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 read-only listing tool with strong annotations, a complete parameter schema, and an output schema (present but not shown), the description is sufficient. It explains the primary use case and the result ordering, while the schema and annotations cover the remainder.

    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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides; it only reinforces the 'newest first' ordering already mentioned in the limit parameter's description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

    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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('published version numbers and dist-tags for a package from the npm registry'), and adds the 'newest first' ordering. It also signals the sibling relationship by noting this is useful before requesting metadata, distinguishing it from get_npm_package_metadata.

    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 clear context: 'Useful for checking what versions exist before requesting metadata for a specific one.' This implies when to use the tool versus fetching metadata, though it does not explicitly name the sibling or state exclusions. It is sufficient guidance without being overly prescriptive.

    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?

    Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable non-obvious behaviors: default 'latest' version, abbreviated vs. full metadata, allVersions precedence, and .npmrc auth/registry handling. This goes beyond the structured annotations, though it doesn't cover error cases or rate limits.

    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 3 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then details key options and edge cases. Every sentence adds information, with no fluff or repetition of schema descriptions.

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

    Completeness4/5

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

    With an output schema present, returning values need not be explained. The description covers the tool's main behavioral facets: version selection, metadata format, allVersions precedence, and support for scoped/private packages with .npmrc. Minor gaps like error handling are not critical given the read-only nature and available schema.

    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 detailed parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description enriches semantics by explaining the relationship between fullMetadata and allVersions, and the performance implications of abbreviated vs. full documents. It adds value beyond the schema's per-field 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch metadata for a package from the npm registry.' It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool (list_npm_package_versions) by focusing on metadata retrieval, not just version listing. The additional details about version selection and metadata formats reinforce scope.

    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 clear context on how to use the tool: default to 'latest', options for fullMetadata and allVersions, with precedence noted. It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over list_npm_package_versions, but the usage context is otherwise strong. Missing explicit exclusions or alternatives drops it slightly from a 5.

    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

npm-registry-mcp-server MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

npm-registry-mcp-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/yuchen814/npm-registry-mcp-server'

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