Skip to main content
Glama

Reddit

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 declare safe, idempotent, read-only. Description adds that it fans out to two services, explains partial failure (sources_failed) and a timing caveat (bundlephobia first measurement 5-30s). No contradiction.

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?

Single paragraph but well-organized: starts with purpose, usage, output details, then limitations. Slightly dense but not verbose; could be slightly more structured with bullet points but still effective.

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?

For a composite tool with no output schema, description covers input, output structure, behavior, fallbacks, and ecosystem limitations. An agent has sufficient information to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (package and version). Description adds context: scoped packages accepted, version defaults to latest. Provides value beyond schema but schema already covers basics.

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?

Description clearly states it's a composite check for npm packages, listing specific data aggregated (license, advisories, bundle size, etc.). Differentiates from siblings by noting NPM-only in v1 and directing other ecosystems to 'deps.dev:version'.

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''. Also mentions NPM-only limitation and alternative for other ecosystems, providing clear when-to-use and when-not.

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

All Reddit 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The set has several near-duplicate tools: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly designed to be identical right now, and ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and bet_research all overlap on routed data lookup. The three Reddit tools are distinct, but they are dwarfed by a large cluster of unrelated Pipeworx/Polymarket tools, making the actual purpose of the set hard to pin down.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are wildly mixed: some tools use verb_noun (get_post, subscribe, suggest_questions), some use noun phrases (entity_profile, recent_alerts, pipeworx_trending), and some use ad-hoc names (ask_pipeworx, bet_research, scan_dependency). Within sub-families (polymarket_*, ask_pipeworx_*) names are consistent, but overall there is no single predictable pattern.

Tool Count1/5

34 tools is excessive for a server named 'Reddit' when only 3 of them (get_post, get_subreddit, search_posts) actually relate to Reddit. The remaining 31 tools cover unrelated domains like Pipeworx data routing, Polymarket betting, memory management, and npm dependency scanning—an extreme scope mismatch for the advertised server name.

Completeness1/5

The Reddit surface is severely incomplete: it offers read-only post/subreddit/search functionality with no create, edit, delete, vote, comment, or user-profile operations. Conversely, the Pipeworx tooling is over-complete relative to the 'Reddit' name, covering data lookups, prediction markets, subscriptions, and memory—none of which belong in a Reddit server.

Resources