Skip to main content
Glama

roastify-mcp

by io.github.lonniev

Roastify Session Status

roastify_session_status

Check operator readiness. Returns the operator lifecycle state and clear guidance on what to do next. Free.

Lifecycle states:

  • ready: Operator is warm and fully operational — vault AND pricing model verified. Proceed with tool calls.

  • warming_up: Operator is initializing (cold start). Try a tool call — it will warm up on demand.

  • misconfigured: Persistence rejected a query with a permanent SQL error (permission denied, missing relation). Paid tools will fail until the operator repairs the database — retrying does not help.

  • quota_exceeded: The persistence provider (Neon) answered HTTP 402 — the operator's database has exhausted its compute/storage quota, so the books are locked for billing. Paid tools fail; retrying does NOT help. The operator's Authority must restore capacity (upgrade the plan or wait for the quota reset). Free tools remain available.

  • not_registered: Operator has no Authority relationship yet. Call register_operator first.

  • no_identity: Operator nsec is not configured. Deployment issue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
patron_npubNoOptional. If supplied, the response includes an ``upstream_oauth`` block with the patron's stored OAuth token expiry (runtime-derived from vault state) so a client can refresh proactively rather than reactively after a stale-token failure.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden and succeeds: it defines all six lifecycle states, indicates that paid tools fail in some states while free tools remain available, and explicitly warns that retrying does not help for permanent failures. This goes well beyond a simple status report.

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 well structured: a one-sentence summary, a free-tool note, and a compact bulleted state list with consistent formatting. Every line contributes useful information and the actionable guidance is front-loaded.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and the tool has a single optional, fully documented parameter, the description covers the essential operational context: state meanings, failure semantics, and recommended next actions. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to decide whether and how to call it.

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?

The only parameter, patron_npub, is fully documented in the input schema with its purpose and the upstream_oauth block behavior, so the description does not need to compensate. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

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: 'Check operator readiness' and states it returns the operator lifecycle state and next-step guidance. It is clear about the tool's domain, though it does not explicitly draw contrast with sibling status tools like roastify_service_status or roastify_adoption_status.

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 gives actionable usage guidance per lifecycle state: try a tool call while warming up, call register_operator first if not_registered, and do not retry for misconfigured or quota_exceeded. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over sibling alternatives, but the conditions for acting on its result are well specified.

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

All roastify-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target clearly distinct resources—patron balances vs. operator Authority balances, design text vs. full design fetches, operator vs. patron credentials—and the verbose descriptions carefully separate request/receive flows. A few pairs could still be confused at a glance, such as service_status/session_status, forget_coupon/delete_coupon, and get_design_text/fetch_design.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the roastify_ snake_case prefix and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern like list_, get_, update_, delete_, and create. However, several noun-only names (service_status, session_status, account_statement, oracle_about) and the inconsistent forget_ vs. delete_ distinction for credential/coupon removal keep it from being fully consistent.

Tool Count1/5

69 tools is an extreme count for a single MCP surface and far exceeds the 25+ threshold. Even though the tools span many subdomains—design, payments, coupons, credentials, pricing, notarization, oracle—the sheer number will be heavy on agent context and selection accuracy.

Completeness3/5

Core workflows are largely covered: design storage/editing, coupon lifecycle, credential vaults, credit purchasing, pricing models, notarization, and the oracle all have reasonable read/write surfaces. However, session_status explicitly tells not_registered operators to call register_operator, which does not exist in the tool set, and design editing lacks any delete-element operation, leaving notable dead ends.

Resources