Schema Change Gate
Server Details
Replay supplied records against old and new bounded JSON Schema draft-07 contracts. Receive exact...
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolcompare_schema_examplesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Replay supplied records against old and new bounded JSON Schema draft-07 contracts. Receive exact regression indices, reasons and a request digest. Results cover the supplied corpus only. Price: 0.02 USDC per completed bounded job on Base.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| examples | Yes | ||
| new_schema | Yes | ||
| old_schema | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the paid nature ('Price: 0.02 USDC per completed bounded job on Base') and the guarantee that results are restricted to the supplied corpus. There is no contradiction with the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences front-load the action and output, with scope and pricing notes placed at the end. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler or repetition of schema content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a paid, externally-scoped job with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description covers the action, output shape, scope, and cost. However, it leaves ambiguity around what 'bounded' means, when billing actually triggers (e.g., if a job fails partway), and error/failure semantics for invalid records — details an agent would need before invoking a paid tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'supplied records' to the examples parameter and 'old and new bounded JSON Schema draft-07 contracts' to old_schema/new_schema, adding the version and bounded qualifiers. However, it does not define what constitutes a valid record/example or what constraints 'bounded' imposes, leaving format details ambiguous.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific verb and resource: 'Replay supplied records against old and new bounded JSON Schema draft-07 contracts.' It also states the exact outputs ('exact regression indices, reasons and a request digest'), so an agent knows precisely what the tool does and what it returns.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
With no sibling tools, explicit alternative-routing is unnecessary. The scope caveat 'Results cover the supplied corpus only' sets a clear expectation about when the results are meaningful, and 'draft-07'/'bounded' qualifiers imply a schema-migration regression-testing use case. It could explicitly say 'use when checking schema compatibility,' but the context is otherwise clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
1 tool update
- First observed
compare_schema_examples
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Simulate a CSV import against a supplied typed column contract and return exact accepted rows, re...
Validates JSON against a JSON Schema, lists violations. x402 payment required (testnet USDC).
11Monitor MCP servers, API contracts and AI outputs for schema drift. Alerts on breaking changes.
Deterministic acceptance report for a supplied product catalog: validates price/currency/availabi...
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceProvides a streamable HTTP endpoint for compatibility analysis, with published contracts and schemas for integration.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceReplay-verified minimal JSON reproductions and deterministic TypeScript/OpenAPI drift checks. Local-first CLI and MCP server.841Mozilla Public 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceValidates AI-generated artifacts (JSON, API responses, SQL) against a contract and returns a verdict.1591MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceValidates JSON payloads against JSON Schema deterministically, providing precise validation results and error paths.183-
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. The name and description clearly define its purpose as comparing records against old and new schemas.
A single tool uses a clear, descriptive snake_case name. There are no other tools to create inconsistent naming patterns.
One tool is borderline thin but reasonable for a narrowly scoped server. The function is specific and self-contained, though the 'Schema Change Gate' name hints at a broader workflow.
The tool fulfills its stated comparison task well, but there are minor gaps like no schema diffing, result history, or approval step. Agents can work around these missing features.