apps_embedGet the HTML that puts an app on another page — an iframe tag pointing at the app, which runs there sandboxed the same way it runs here. Apps that charge cannot be embedded, and an app that calls mu. only reaches this instance from a page on it
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The app's URL slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With only a title annotation, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well by explaining the return value, sandboxed execution, payment restrictions, and a cross-origin caveat. It does not cover every edge case, such as errors or access requirements, but provides meaningful behavior beyond the schema.
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?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the key purpose. The second sentence contains a slightly awkward phrase, but every part contributes useful constraint information.
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?
For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned, how the embedded app runs, and important exclusions. It is mostly complete, though the cross-instance behavior could be clearer.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single 'slug' parameter is already documented as 'The app's URL slug'. The description adds little parameter-specific meaning, but the schema is sufficient on its own.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource: get the HTML (an iframe tag) for embedding an app on another page. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling app operations like apps_build, apps_read, or apps_test.
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?
The intended use case is clear: obtain embeddable HTML for an app. It also gives a when-not condition by noting that paid apps cannot be embedded, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool is prefixed with a clear domain (e.g., apps_, blog_, transit_), and the suffix identifies a distinct action or resource. Overlapping tools like archive_search and news_search are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.
All tools consistently use a domain_prefix_suffix pattern, but the suffix is sometimes a verb (create, list, search) and sometimes a noun (inbox, status, address). This minor mixing prevents a perfect score but remains predictable and readable.
With 113 tools, the count is far beyond the typical well-scoped range, even for a broad personal assistant. While each tool is distinct and serves a purpose, the sheer number is overwhelming and could be better organized into separate domain-specific servers.
Each domain has near-complete lifecycle coverage, including CRUD and search where relevant, with only minor gaps such as missing apps_delete or events_update. The wide range of covered domains itself demonstrates strong completeness for a general assistant.