Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-apisix

mcp-apisix

by zhouweico
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

apisix_validate_resource_config

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate APISIX resource configuration against JSON schema before submission. Checks schema conformance for routes, upstreams, services, etc., with graceful degradation on older APISIX versions.

Instructions

校验资源配置是否符合 JSON schema（需 APISIX ≥3.5）。

仅校验 JSON schema，不校验引用存在性与插件配置合法性。 通过不代表写入必定成功。<3.5 实例上优雅降级。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "resource": "<resource>",
      "config": "<config>"
    },
    "name": "apisix_validate_resource_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
configYes待提交的资源配置体（JSON object），符合对应资源的 JSON schema
resourceYes资源类型：routes / upstreams / services 等

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

注释已声明 readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint，描述额外提供了版本要求（≥3.5）、校验范围限制（不校验引用存在性与插件配置合法性）、通过不代表写入成功，以及 <3.5 优雅降级的行为。这些信息远超注释本身，显著增强行为透明度，且无矛盾。

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?

描述仅 3 句话，首句即点明核心功能，第二、三句提供必要限制和版本行为，无冗余或重复信息，结构紧凑且重点前置。

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?

工具简单且参数完备，注释丰富。描述涵盖了版本要求、校验范围和降级行为，但未说明具体返回值（如成功/失败如何表示）及降级时的确切表现，略有欠缺，但整体足以指导使用。

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 中两个参数（resource、config）均有详细描述，覆盖率达 100%。描述虽提到'资源配置'，但未在 schema 基础上增加额外参数级语义，因此按基线给予 3 分。

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?

明确说明工具用于校验资源配置是否符合 JSON schema，动词（校验）+ 对象（资源配置）+ 标准（JSON schema）清晰。与兄弟工具的 get/list 操作区分明显，具有唯一性。

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?

描述隐含使用场景（提交资源配置前进行预校验），并通过'仅校验 JSON schema，不校验引用存在性与插件配置合法性'和'通过不代表写入必定成功'提示了边界。虽然未显式说明何时使用 vs 替代工具，但兄弟工具均无校验功能，上下文足够清晰。

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools