A
licenseA
qualityA
maintenanceEnables AI agents and software to detect ambiguous wording in text and receive location, category, explanation, and suggested clarification questions for each signal.
1
Apache 2.0
CURRENT SEA - Ambiguity Scan
Server Details
Explainable ambiguity signals for text. Submitted text is processed but never retained.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolscan_ambiguityAInspect
Find wording that may need clarification.
Use this when an agent needs an inexpensive, deterministic, explainable check for vague timing, quantities, references, commitments, or standards. The service retains invocation metadata but never the submitted text. Signals are possible issues, not proof of ambiguity.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Text to inspect; it is processed but not retained. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does this well by stating that invocation metadata is retained but submitted text is not, and that signals are 'possible issues, not proof of ambiguity.' It also describes the tool as inexpensive, deterministic, and explainable, which helps set expectations.
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 short but information-dense. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by usage context and important behavioral caveats. Every sentence earns its place without repetition 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?
The tool has one well-documented parameter and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers when to use it, what it does, and important privacy/interpretation caveats. Nothing essential for an agent to invoke it correctly appears to be missing.
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?
There is only one parameter and the schema description already covers it with 'Text to inspect; it is processed but not retained.' The tool description reinforces the non-retention point but does not add new semantic meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Find wording that may need clarification.' It clearly identifies the tool's function and even outlines the kinds of ambiguity it targets (vague timing, quantities, references, commitments, standards). With no sibling tools, this is sufficient for an agent to know exactly what the tool does.
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?
The description explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this when an agent needs an inexpensive, deterministic, explainable check...' This gives clear context and expected conditions. It does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but since there are no sibling tools, this is not a significant gap.
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
scan_ambiguity
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
Prompt injection detection API for AI agents. Scan untrusted text before passing it to an LLM.
Sentiment, toxicity, entity extraction, PII, translation, summary, QA, fraud scoring, safety audit.
Text Intelligence delivers robust NLP capabilities without the hassle of authentication or
Deterministic prompt-injection detector; signed, offline-verifiable verdicts. Not an LLM.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceBilingual (EN/ES) AI-writing detection that shows the evidence instead of a percentage: named tells with line and column, hidden-character inspection, and citation cross-checking against a document's own bibliography. Seven of its nine tools run entirely locally and never touch the network.1020MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceProvides local, deterministic scoring and detailed auditing of text for AI-writing patterns via two read-only tools, with no network calls or language models.21642MIT
- FlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceL1-aware grammar, style, translation & tone tools with 70 local rules. Zero API keys needed.4-
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools.
Naming Consistency5/5
The single tool 'scan_ambiguity' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent and descriptive.
Tool Count3/5
With only one tool, the server falls below the typical 3-15 range, making the surface feel thin for a general-purpose server, though it may be acceptable for a narrow utility.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers the core ambiguity-checking function well, but as a single operation it lacks auxiliary features like batch processing or result retrieval, representing minor gaps.