Skip to main content
Glama

Theaudiodb

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. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds valuable behavioral details: fans out to two services, partial failure graceful degradation, and a 5-30s delay for new versions. This fully informs the agent of runtime behavior.

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 dense but well-organized: purpose first, then features, usage, caveats. Every sentence adds value 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?

Without an output schema, the description details the returned fields (summary block, advisories, links, alternative versions) and error handling. It covers all essential information for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 a useful note about scoped packages for the 'package' parameter, and confirms default behavior for 'version'. This provides extra context beyond the schema.

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 composite check purpose for evaluating npm packages, with specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'validate_claim' by focusing on package viability.

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 states when to use ('is X safe / popular / small' or 'what does adding lodash cost me') and when not (non-npm ecosystems have alternative tools). No ambiguity.

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

All Theaudiodb 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
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes and detailed descriptions, but ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently identical, and several data-answer/prediction-market tools overlap in intent. The music tools are generally separable once name-vs-ID and album-vs-track distinctions are recognized.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow lowercase snake_case with a verb-first or domain-prefixed pattern (search_artist, get_album_tracks, validate_claim, polymarket_edges). Minor deviations like remember/recall/forget and recent_alerts/recent_changes break the pattern slightly but do not create real confusion.

Tool Count1/5

35 tools is far too many for a server named TheAudioDB, and only 4 of them are actually music-metadata tools. The remaining 31 tools form an unrelated Pipeworx/Polymarket data-research platform, which is an extreme scope mismatch rather than a modest overage.

Completeness2/5

The music-metadata surface covers artist search, album search, artist-by-ID, and album tracks, but there is no track search, no album-by-ID getter, and no general track lookup, so common music queries will dead-end. The unrelated Pipeworx side is broad, but for a server presented as TheAudioDB the domain coverage has significant gaps.

Resources