Create a Compiler Explorer short URL for sharing code with compiler settings
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | Source code | |
| options | No | Compiler flags (e.g. "-O2 -std=c++20") | |
| compiler | Yes | Compiler ID from list_compilers (e.g. "g161", "clang_trunk") | |
| language | Yes | Language ID (e.g. "c++", "c", "rust") | |
| libraries | No | Libraries to include. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no new behavioral context beyond 'create'. It does not contradict annotations but also does not elaborate on side effects, authentication, or rate limits. With annotations present, a score of 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description is a single sentence (12 words) that is front-loaded with the verb 'Create'. It is concise and contains no filler or redundant information.
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?
There is no output schema, and the description does not explain what the short URL looks like, how it is returned, or any prerequisites (e.g., valid compiler must be selected). For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is too brief to fully guide an agent.
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?
All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description does not add any parameter details beyond what the schema provides. The description's mention of 'compiler settings' vaguely references parameters but adds no specific semantics.
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 'Create a Compiler Explorer short URL for sharing code with compiler settings' clearly states the verb (create), resource (short URL), and purpose (sharing code with settings). It distinguishes from siblings like 'compile' (run code) and 'get_shortlink_info' (retrieve link info).
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?
The description implies usage for sharing code but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., 'compile' for running code, 'get_shortlink_info' for retrieving existing links). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: compiling code, sharing via short URLs, retrieving sharing info, listing compilers, languages, libraries, and looking up assembly instructions. No two tools overlap in functionality.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., list_compilers, generate_short_url, lookup_asm_instruction). The naming is uniform and predictable.
With 7 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose. It covers core compilation, sharing, metadata exploration, and instruction documentation without being too sparse or bloated.
The tool set covers the primary workflow (compile, share, browse metadata) and includes a unique instruction lookup. A minor gap is the lack of detailed compiler information beyond listing, but this does not significantly hinder the agent's ability to use the server effectively.
