Skip to main content
Glama

Press Release

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Scan Dependency

scan_dependency
Read-onlyIdempotent

Composite "should I add this npm package to my project" check in ONE call — fans out across deps.dev (license + advisories + version history) and bundlephobia (gzipped/minified bundle size, dependency count, ESM/tree-shake support). Use whenever an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me". Returns a summary block (is_latest, license, published_at, advisory_count, bundle_kb_min, bundle_kb_gz, dependency_count, has_esm, tree_shakeable), per-advisory detail, links, and a list of recent alternative versions. NPM ecosystem only in v1; PyPI / Maven / Cargo / Go fall under deps.dev:version directly. Partial failures degrade gracefully — bundlephobia's first measurement on a new version can take 5-30s; sources_failed will list it if it times out, the rest still returns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packageYesnpm package name. Scoped packages (e.g. "@types/node") are accepted.
versionNoSpecific version to check (e.g., "18.3.1"). Defaults to the latest published version when omitted.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, not destructive. The description adds details about fan-out to deps.dev and bundlephobia, partial failure handling, and 5-30s delay for first bundlephobia measurement, which are not in annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single paragraph that efficiently packs all key information. It is front-loaded with purpose, then details. Somewhat dense but retains readability.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explicitly lists all return fields (summary block, per-advisory, links, alternatives) and covers edge cases (partial failures, version default). Complete for the tool's complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds useful context: acceptance of scoped packages and default version behavior, which goes slightly beyond schema descriptions.

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 it's a composite check for npm packages covering license, advisories, bundle size, etc. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying NPM-only and referencing deps.dev:version for other ecosystems.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use whenever an agent asks "is X safe / popular / small" or "what does adding lodash cost me"' and notes NPM-only scope, with alternative for other ecosystems.

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

All Press Release 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have unclear boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-identical variants (beta is explicitly identical to stable), and the six Polymarket tools heavily overlap in finding edges and arbitrage. discover_tools and suggest_questions also serve similar discovery purposes, causing likely misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

All names are lowercase snake_case with mostly verb-first or clear prefixes (ask_, polymarket_, pipeworx_, recent_). Minor deviations like `press_release_generate` (noun-verb) and `entity_profile` (noun-noun) break the otherwise consistent pattern, but the naming remains readable and predictable.

Tool Count2/5

At 32 tools, the count exceeds the 25+ threshold and feels bloated for a server whose stated purpose is 'Press Release.' The toolset sprawls across unrelated domains (data lookups, prediction markets, memory, AI visibility, npm scanning), making the size more of a liability than a well-scoped strength.

Completeness2/5

For a server named 'Press Release,' the surface is severely incomplete: only one satirical press release generator exists, with no drafting, editing, publishing, or distribution tools. The other 31 tools serve unrelated domains, so an agent expecting press-release lifecycle support hits significant dead ends.

Resources