OSA Procurement Guard
Server Details
Pre-purchase trust, pricing and budget decisions for AI agents buying APIs and MCP tools.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- omarfff/OSA
- GitHub Stars
- 1
Available Tools
1 toolprocurement_decisionAInspect
Use OSA before buying an API or MCP tool. Returns ALLOW, HOLD or DENY using budget policy, endpoint-scoped trust evidence, price history and optional cheaper equivalents. Get an OSA API key at https://pkctqxeydfuiupadaoov.supabase.co/functions/v1/procurement-site.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Optional OSA registry name | |
| asset | No | ||
| network | No | ||
| endpoint | No | Paid API or tool endpoint URL | |
| min_trust | No | ||
| capability | No | Explicit capability; required to search equivalent alternatives | |
| max_price_usd | No | ||
| offered_price_usd | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations provide little (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false) and nothing contradicts them. The description adds context about the decision inputs and the need to obtain an OSA API key, but it does not disclose whether the call has side effects, makes an external network request, or how the key is supplied.
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?
Two dense sentences front-load the action and outcome and then give the key setup URL. Every phrase adds information; there is no filler or repetition of the schema.
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?
With no output schema, the description only enumerates ALLOW/HOLD/DENY without specifying their format or what triggers each verdict. Given eight parameters and almost no parameter guidance, an agent would still be guessing about valid invocations and required setup.
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?
Only 38% of schema properties have descriptions, and the tool description barely compensates: 'budget policy' and 'cheaper equivalents' only loosely map to price/capability fields. It does not explain asset, network, min_trust, max_price_usd, offered_price_usd, or the anyOf requirement between name and endpoint.
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?
States a specific purpose: call before buying an API/MCP tool and return ALLOW/HOLD/DENY. The decision inputs (budget policy, trust evidence, price history, cheaper equivalents) further clarify what the tool evaluates. No siblings exist, so no differentiation is needed.
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?
Explicitly tells the agent when to invoke it ('before buying an API or MCP tool') and supplies an API-key acquisition URL, signaling an auth prerequisite. There are no alternative tools or exclusions, so no when-not-to-use guidance is possible.
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
procurement_decision
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
Pre-purchase trust checks for AI agents: recalls, scam signals, proceed/caution/avoid verdict.
Pay-per-use tool marketplace for AI agents. Search, price-check, and call APIs via MCP.
Procure governed AI capabilities: machine-readable price, scope, trust, gateway-delegation terms.
- bitroadOAuthai.bitroad
Marketplace for AI agents: buy goods and services under spending caps, with returns and disputes.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA per-call payment trust and reputation API for AI agents, allowing agents to check if a counterparty is safe to pay before making a payment.02MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenancePay-per-use tool marketplace for AI agents. Search, price-check, and call APIs via MCP.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceProvides AI agents with trust scoring and reputation management capabilities for secure interactions. Enables agents to check trust scores, rate interactions, and manage disputes before transacting with other agents.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to discover, price, and purchase SaaS products, developer tools, and MCP servers with live Stripe checkout, affiliate program, and AgentTrust verification.MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only a single tool, there is no potential for confusion between tools. The purpose of 'procurement_decision' is clear and unambiguous.
The tool name 'procurement_decision' is self-consistent, though it uses a noun-noun construction rather than the typical verb_noun pattern. With only one tool, there are no naming inconsistencies to evaluate.
The server has exactly one tool, which is borderline thin. A single-purpose decision tool could be appropriate, but it lacks any supporting operations for policy management or history, making the scope feel slightly too narrow.
The tool covers a single decision action but omits obvious related operations such as viewing policy details, updating budgets, or retrieving past decision history. Agents cannot manage or audit the procurement policy, creating significant gaps.