Coding Guides
Server Details
Coding guidelines and best-practice guides for 130+ languages, frameworks, and tools.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- delian/codeguide-mcp
- GitHub Stars
- 0
- Server Listing
- codeguide-mcp
Available Tools
1 toolget_guideCInspect
Get the content of a specific coding guide.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| guide_name | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral transparency burden. The word 'get' weakly implies read-only behavior, but the description does not disclose how the returned content is structured, what happens for an invalid guide_name, what permissions are needed, or whether the response can be large or truncated.
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 short sentence and contains no redundant words or clutter. It is not rewarded with a 5 because the desired compactness leads to omission of essential usage context; it is concise but only minimally informative.
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?
Even though an output schema exists, the overall definition lacks needed context for correct invocation: there is no explanation of valid guide-name values, no fallback or error behavior, and no pointer to another tool for discovering or listing guide_name. An agent can make a rough call but does not have enough information to handle edge cases or verify the call beforehand.
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?
The one parameter, guide_name, has 0% schema description coverage and no enums. The description only refers to 'a specific coding guide,' adding no detail about what a valid guide_name looks like, which guide names are available, or whether the name is a title, slug, or path.
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 clearly identifies the action ('get') and the resource ('content of a specific coding guide'), so it is not a tautology or vague. However, it does not distinguish this tool from any alternative such as listing or searching guides, even though no siblings are given in this definition.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or what prerequisites must be satisfied. The sentence simply restates the tool's function without placing it in a decision flow or naming supporting tools such as one that lists available guide names.
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
get_guide
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
AI-powered codebase analysis — call graphs, security, dead code, complexity. 150+ tools.
Governance copilot for AI-assisted coding. 72 packs, 532 rules, proof bundles.
Code intelligence for coding agents: semantic, AST, graph, and full-text search. 279+ languages.
Ship better Java with your coding agent.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceProvides tools for accessing coding style guidelines and best practices for various technologies including Java, Python, and React.317MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides Python and FastAPI coding best practices with searchable guidelines, code review capabilities, and actionable improvement suggestions with examples across general coding, performance, and code quality categories.-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA server providing programming guidelines and coding standards for multiple languages, enabling access and search of best practices for C#, Go, JavaScript, Python, and TypeScript.314MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI assistants and developers to analyze code for language-specific best practices and idiomatic patterns across programming languages, CI automation, and configuration formats.162MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The tool's purpose (getting a coding guide) is unambiguous and clearly described.
The single tool name 'get_guide' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, consistent with naming conventions. With only one tool, consistency is trivially maintained.
A single tool feels thin for a server dedicated to coding guides. While the tool is functional, typical users would expect at least a listing or search capability, placing it in the borderline category.
The server only provides 'get_guide', missing essential operations like listing available guides or searching across guides. This is a significant gap that will limit an agent's ability to discover what guides exist, causing potential failures.