A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceDeterministic JSON validation and repair for AI agents. Validates, repairs, schema-checks, and diffs JSON so long-running agents don't corrupt their session state with malformed writes.
MIT
validate
Server Details
Deterministic validation for AI-generated artifacts: JSON Schema, OpenAPI response, SQL syntax.
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
- Repository
- machinegrade/validate
- GitHub Stars
- 1
- Server Listing
- machinegrade-validate
Available Tools
1 toolvalidateAInspect
Validate an artifact against a contract (json_schema | openapi_response | sql) via the machinegrade validate API.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | Yes | Which validator to run. | |
| artifact | Yes | The artifact to validate, as a JSON value — not a JSON-encoded string. json_schema/openapi_response: the object/array/value itself. sql: the SQL statement as a string. | |
| contract | No | Validator-specific contract. json_schema: { schema }. openapi_response: { spec, path, method, status }. sql: { dialect }. |
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'validate' which implies a non-mutating check, but it does not describe return format, error behavior, or whether the operation is read-only. Key behavioral context is missing.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action and supported contract types. 'Via the machinegrade validate API' is slightly redundant but does not add significant noise. It is concise and to the point.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the validation response looks like, how to interpret results, or any error conditions, leaving the agent with significant ambiguity about expected outputs.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% — all three parameters (type, artifact, contract) are described in detail. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the enum values in the schema, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Validate an artifact against a contract' and enumerates the supported contract types (json_schema | openapi_response | sql). This gives a specific verb, resource, and scope, making it obvious 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 implies when to use this tool by listing the three validator types, providing clear context for common validation scenarios. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, as no sibling tools are present.
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
- Changed
validate3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / artifact / descriptionPrevious value: -"The artifact to validate (object for json_schema/openapi_response, SQL string for sql)."New value: +"The artifact to validate, as a JSON value — not a JSON-encoded string. json_schema/openapi_response: the object/array/value itself. sql: the SQL statement as a string." - added
Input schema / properties / artifact / typeAdded value: +[ + "object", + "array", + "string", + "number", + "boolean", + "null" +] - added
Input schema / properties / contract / typeAdded value: +"object"
1 tool update
- First observed
validate
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
Preflight QA for AI-agent deliverables with structured verdicts and repair guidance.
Deterministic safety, correctness & cost gate that vets Postgres SQL before your AI agent runs it.
Verified AI-agent outcomes: secret scanning, JSON cleanup, dedupe, anomaly and schema checks.
Deterministic JSON repair, validate, example-gen, schema-coerce for agents. Zero LLM, sub-10ms.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to run deterministic API validation and UI DOM checks, verifying HTTP status codes, JSON schema fields, and page elements with programmatic proof instead of LLM guesswork.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMonitor AI output schemas and API contracts for breaking changes — validate LLM JSON responses against defined schemas on a schedule-
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceValidates AI-generated Python: syntax, lint, security scan and deterministic repair.3MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
There is only one tool, so there is no possibility of confusing it with others. The tool's purpose is clear and singular.
Naming Consistency5/5
With a single tool named 'validate', the naming is consistent and follows a simple verb format. There are no mixed conventions to cause confusion.
Tool Count2/5
The server has only one tool, which feels too few for any meaningful scope. Even for a narrow validation purpose, this is excessively minimal and likely to miss common requirements.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers the core validation action, supporting multiple contract types. However, it lacks ancillary operations such as batch validation, schema management, or result history, which are minor gaps for the stated purpose.