F
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceEnables AI clients to search live documentation for popular developer libraries and return clean, source-cited summaries via a RAG pipeline.
1
-
developer-toolkit-mcp
Server Details
The documentation, as a tool your agent can call: 950+ AI-dev guides. Search + fetch tools.
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
- mjaskolski/developer-toolkit-mcp
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Available Tools
2 toolsfetchFetch a documentation articleARead-onlyInspect
Retrieve the complete markdown of one documentation article by the id returned from search (for example en/claude-code/advanced-techniques/hooks-automation).
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Article id from a `search` result. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | |
| url | Yes | |
| text | Yes | |
| title | Yes | |
| metadata | Yes |
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the output is markdown and the id source, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination or error handling. Since annotations carry the main transparency load, the added value is modest.
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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and the parameter source. Every word earns its place with no redundancy 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 is simple with one parameter, read-only annotations, and an output schema. The description covers the essential workflow (use id from search), and the output schema handles return values, so no additional information is needed for completeness.
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%, and the schema already describes `id` as 'Article id from a `search` result.' The description repeats the same information without adding new meaning, so it doesn't compensate beyond the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 specifies the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'complete markdown of one documentation article', and it explicitly mentions the id comes from `search`, distinguishing it from the sibling tool. The purpose is unmistakable.
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 states that the id must come from a `search` result, which implies usage after search. It provides clear context on how to retrieve the id, but it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives beyond the implied `search` workflow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
searchSearch the documentationARead-onlyInspect
Search the AI Developer Toolkit documentation: 950+ guides on Cursor, Claude Code and OpenAI Codex, covering setup, agent workflows, hooks, MCP, testing, CI and deployment, in English and Polish. Returns ranked results; pass a result id to fetch for the full text.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Natural-language query or keywords. Polish queries return Polish articles. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| results | Yes |
TDQS
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and closed-world. The description adds extra context about returning ranked results and the bilingual (English/Polish) nature, which goes beyond the annotations. This is useful but not over-elaborated, so a 4 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.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loads the tool's purpose and scope, and wastes no words. It efficiently communicates all needed information without redundancy.
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?
With a clear scope, ranked results, language coverage, and a pointer to the sibling tool for full text, combined with read-only annotations and an output schema, the description is complete. There is no missing behavioral or workflow context for this simple tool.
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 schema description already fully covers the `query` parameter (100% coverage), and the description does not add further parameter-specific meaning. The description mentions Polish and English, but that overlaps with schema information about Polish queries, so the added value is minimal.
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 identifies the tool as a search over the AI Developer Toolkit documentation, specifies the covered topics and languages, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `fetch` by stating that full text is retrieved via a result id.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly states the workflow: 'pass a result id to fetch for the full text' – indicating when to use fetch and that search is for initial ranked results. This provides clear alternative usage for full text retrieval.
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.
2 tool updates
- First observed
fetch - First observed
search
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
Docs Q&A: search 169 data and AI guides, fetch any page as markdown. Read-only, keyless.
62 real-world tools for agents: search, scraping, social, enrichment, image, video, voice.
@latest documentation and code examples to 9000+ libraries for LLMs and AI code editors in a singl…
15 media & data tools for AI agents: search, transcribe, subtitles, voiceover, translate & more.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to search and retrieve Holochain documentation, including developer guides, HDK functions, and HDI API references.2-
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvides AI models with direct access to documentation for over 600 technologies from DevDocs.io, including popular languages, frameworks, and tools. It enables comprehensive searching, content retrieval, and offline access via an intelligent local caching system.122-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceOn-device documentation search for agents54MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools have completely distinct purposes: search queries the documentation index, while fetch retrieves a specific article by ID. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Naming Consistency4/5
Both tool names are single lowercase verbs ('search', 'fetch'), which is consistent in style. However, they lack a noun prefix (e.g., 'search_docs', 'fetch_article'), but the pattern is uniform and predictable.
Tool Count3/5
With only 2 tools, the set feels minimal but is perfectly scoped for a documentation search-and-retrieve utility. It's on the low end of acceptable, but the narrow purpose justifies the small count.
Completeness4/5
The search-fetch pair covers the core workflow for documentation lookup. A 'list' or 'browse' tool could be useful, but for a search-driven retrieval server, these two tools satisfy the primary use case without major gaps.