Skip to main content
Glama
weikio

Weik.io Integration Expert MCP Server

Official
by weikio
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Weik.io Integration Expert: MCP Server

npm version Docker Image

Project Overview

This Model Context Protocol (MCP) server is designed specifically for the Weik.io Integration Platform, providing an intelligent assistant that guides developers through the complete integration lifecycle from planning through implementation, testing, and deployment.

Weik.io is an open source integration and automation platform with agent-based architecture supporting cloud, on-premise, and hybrid deployments. It is built on Apache Camel and extends it with specialized capabilities including Integration Flows, API Management, Managed File Transfers, Event Hub, Entity Store, and Database change tracking.

The MCP server exposes tools and resources that enable AI assistants to help with Weik.io integration tasks, providing access to Weik.io functionality, Apache Camel component metadata, and Kamelet information.

Related MCP server: MCP Integration Suite Server

Configuration

Docker-based Configuration

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "weikio": {
      "command": "docker",
      "args": [
        "run",
        "-i",
        "--rm",
        "--network=host",
        "ghcr.io/weikio/mcp-server:latest"
      ],
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": []
    }
  }
}

NPX-based Configuration

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "weikio": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@weikio/mcp-server"
      ],
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": []
    }
  }
}

MCP Tools Implementation

1. Planning Tools

  • get_supported_integration_types: Get information about supported integration types (implemented)

  • analyze_integration_requirements: Determine optimal approach and technology (planned)

  • suggest_integration_pattern: Recommend appropriate pattern for requirements (planned)

  • get_best_practices: Retrieve relevant best practices for specific integration type (planned)

2. Implementation Tools

  • initialize_integration: Initialize a new integration flow with the specified name (implemented)

  • generate_camel_integration: Generate Camel YAML flow (planned)

  • generate_mft_configuration: Generate MFT config for file operations (planned)

  • create_data_transformation: Build JQ or other transformations based on sample data (planned)

  • validate_implementation: Check implementation against best practices (planned)

  • apply_best_practices: Analyze and enhance existing integration with best practices (planned)

  • get_best_practice: Retrieve detailed information about specific best practices (planned)

  • check_compliance: Validate integration against best practice standards (planned)

3. Testing & Debugging Tools

  • identify_test_parameters: Determine required parameters for testing (planned)

  • generate_test_configuration: Create test setup files (planned)

  • create_test_data: Generate mock data for testing (planned)

  • debug_transformation: Interactive JQ/transformation debugging (planned)

  • analyze_payload: Examine message structure at any point (planned)

  • trace_message_flow: Visualize message path through integration (planned)

  • diagnose_error: Analyze errors and suggest solutions (planned)

4. External Tool Integration

  • setup_ngrok_tunnel: Configure and start an ngrok tunnel for local endpoints (planned)

  • get_ngrok_url: Retrieve current ngrok public URL for use in integrations (planned)

  • create_webhook_endpoint: Generate new webhook.site endpoints for testing (planned)

  • retrieve_webhook_requests: Get received webhook payloads for analysis (planned)

  • run_camel_jbang: Execute Camel scripts for quick testing (planned)

5. Local Weik.io Management

  • get_docker_compose: Get a Docker Compose file for setting up a local Weik.io instance (implemented)

  • start_local_weikio: Start local Weik.io using Docker Compose (planned)

  • stop_local_weikio: Stop the running environment (planned)

  • restart_local_weikio: Restart for quick refresh (planned)

  • get_weikio_status: Simple health check and status reporting (planned)

  • reset_local_weikio: Return environment to clean state (planned)

6. Profile Management

  • list_profiles: List all Weik.io profiles (implemented)

  • add_profile: Add a new Weik.io profile with name, URL, and API key (implemented)

7. Publishing Tools

  • push_integration: Push an integration to a Weik.io instance (implemented)

  • generate_push_commands: Create commands to push to Weik.io (planned)

  • create_deployment_checklist: Generate pre-deployment verification steps (planned)

Technology Overview

Apache Camel:

  • Open source integration framework implementing Enterprise Integration Patterns

  • Rule-based routing and mediation engine with 300+ components

  • Supports multiple connection protocols and data formats

  • Enables complex integrations between disparate systems with minimal code

  • Provides YAML DSL for declarative integration flow definition

Weik.io:

  • Open source integration and automation platform built on Apache Camel

  • Agent-based architecture supporting cloud, on-premise, and hybrid deployments

  • Extends Camel with specialized capabilities including:

    • Integration Flows (system-to-system integration)

    • API Management with built-in gateway

    • Managed File Transfers (MFTs)

    • Event Hub with CloudEvents support

    • Entity Store (key-value with change tracking)

    • Database change tracking

  • Developer-friendly tools with VS Code integration and CLI

  • Enterprise-ready with monitoring, observability, and security features

Current State

The MCP server currently provides:

  • Apache Camel component metadata

  • Apache Camel Kamelet metadata

  • Basic Weik.io CLI operations

  • Integration type decision support

  • Weik.io profile management

  • Docker Compose configuration for local Weik.io instances

  • Integration flow initialization

  • Integration deployment

Integration Flow Initialization

The server now includes a tool called initialize_integration that allows creating a new integration flow:

  • Takes two parameters:

    • name: Name of the integration flow (must be lowercase, can include hyphens)

    • directory: Directory where the integration flow should be created (absolute path)

  • Creates a new folder with the specified name in the specified directory

  • Generates two files within the folder:

    • integration.camel.yaml: Apache Camel YAML flow definition

    • application.properties: Configuration for flow-specific parameters/properties/variables

This tool enables the AI assistant to help users create and set up new integration flows quickly in their preferred location. The integration flow can then be customized based on the user's specific requirements.

Example usage:

// Using the MCP tool
initialize_integration(name: "hello-world", directory: "/path/to/your/project")

// Using the CLI directly
weikio integration init hello-world

Integration Deployment

The server includes a tool called push_integration that allows deploying an integration to a Weik.io instance:

  • Takes two parameters:

    • name: Name of the integration to push (folder name)

    • directory: Directory containing the integration (absolute path)

  • Pushes the integration to the currently active Weik.io profile

  • Validates that the integration exists and contains the required files

This tool enables the AI assistant to help users deploy their integration flows to a Weik.io instance after they have been created and customized.

Example usage:

// Using the MCP tool
push_integration(name: "hello-world", directory: "/path/to/your/project")

// Using the CLI directly
weikio integration push hello-world

Integration Type Decision Support

The server now includes a tool called get_supported_integration_types that provides detailed information about the supported integration types in Weik.io:

  1. Apache Camel Based Integration Flow

    • Description: A flexible integration framework implementing Enterprise Integration Patterns with rule-based routing and mediation engine

    • Main use cases: System-to-system integration, API-based integrations, complex data transformations, etc.

    • Best suited for: Complex integration scenarios, integrations requiring data transformation, API-based integrations, etc.

  2. RCLONE Based Managed File Transfer (MFT)

    • Description: A specialized solution for transferring files between different storage systems with advanced management capabilities

    • Main use cases: File transfers between storage systems, file synchronization, backup and archiving, etc.

    • Best suited for: Simple file transfers between storage systems, regular file synchronization tasks, backup and archiving workflows, etc.

This tool enables the AI assistant to make informed recommendations about which integration type to use based on the user's specific requirements. For example:

  • If a user needs to sync files from SFTP to Azure Blob storage, the assistant will recommend RCLONE based MFT

  • If a user needs to integrate a CRM with an ERP system with data transformations, the assistant will recommend Apache Camel based Integration Flow

The decision logic follows a simple rule: If the task involves transferring files (copy, move, sync) between two file systems (SMB, SFTP, Azure Blob, S3, local directories, etc.), use MFT. Otherwise, use Apache Camel based Integration Flow.

Enhancement Goals

Transform the server into a comprehensive integration expert that can:

  1. Guide integration planning

    • Recommend appropriate patterns and approaches

    • Apply best practices for different integration scenarios

    • Make informed technology decisions (Camel YAML vs. specialized Weik.io features)

  2. Assist with implementation

    • Generate correct Apache Camel YAML syntax

    • Create data transformations (with emphasis on JQ for JSON)

    • Support specialized Weik.io features beyond Camel

  3. Facilitate testing and debugging

    • Identify required test parameters for different integration types

    • Generate test configurations and sample data

    • Provide robust debugging tools for common issues

    • Assist with data transformation troubleshooting

    • Enable detailed inspection of message flow through integration points

    • Guide validation procedures

  4. Streamline deployment

    • Generate correct commands for pushing to Weik.io

    • Provide deployment verification guidance

Architecture

Knowledge Management System

The enhancement introduces a structured knowledge system:

  1. YAML DSL Knowledge Base

    • Apache Camel YAML syntax documentation

    • Element descriptions and syntax rules

    • Example repository (basic to advanced)

  2. Integration Patterns Library

    • Common EIP implementations

    • Use case specific patterns

    • Best practices by scenario

  3. Template System

    • Scenario-based templates

    • Progressive complexity options

    • Customizable parameters

  4. Weik.io Extensions Knowledge Base

    • MFT capabilities and configurations

    • Event sources documentation

    • Variables support

    • Entity store usage patterns

    • Database change tracking

    • Other built-in functionality

  5. Best Practices Framework

    • Design-time best practices

      • Property placeholder usage with Weik.io Variables

      • Naming conventions and structure

      • Error handling patterns

      • Security implementation guidelines

    • Runtime best practices

      • Event streams for webhook integrations

      • Monitoring hooks

      • Logging strategies

      • Performance optimization patterns

    • Operational best practices

      • Deployment strategies

      • Configuration management

      • Versioning approaches

  6. Debugging & Troubleshooting System

    • Data transformation debugging tools

    • Execution flow visualization

    • Error pattern recognition and resolution

    • Payload inspection and validation

File Structure

weikio-server/
├── data/
│   ├── yaml-dsl/              # Apache Camel YAML DSL knowledge
│   │   ├── examples/          # Categorized examples
│   │   ├── elements/          # DSL element documentation
│   │   └── patterns/          # EIP implementation patterns
│   ├── templates/             # Reusable integration templates
│   │   ├── system-to-system/  # System integration templates
│   │   ├── data-processing/   # Data processing templates
│   │   └── api-based/         # API integration templates
│   ├── best-practices/        # Best practices documentation
│   │   ├── design/            # Design-time best practices
│   │   │   ├── property-placeholders.md
│   │   │   ├── naming-conventions.md
│   │   │   └── error-handling.md
│   │   ├── runtime/           # Runtime best practices
│   │   │   ├── event-streams.md
│   │   │   ├── monitoring.md
│   │   │   └── logging.md
│   │   └── operational/       # Operational best practices
│   │       ├── deployment.md
│   │       ├── configuration.md
│   │       └── versioning.md
│   ├── development-tools/     # External development tools
│   │   ├── ngrok/             # ngrok documentation and scripts
│   │   ├── webhook-site/      # webhook.site integration
│   │   ├── camel-jbang/       # Camel JBang scripts and examples
│   │   └── local-weikio/      # Local Weik.io environment
│   │       └── docker-compose.yml  # Docker Compose configuration
│   └── weikio/                # Weik.io-specific knowledge
│       ├── features/          # Built-in feature documentation
│       │   ├── mft/           # Managed File Transfer
│       │   ├── events/        # Event sources
│       │   ├── variables/     # Variables system
│       │   ├── entity-store/  # Key-value store
│       │   └── db-tracking/   # Database change tracking
│       └── best-practices/    # Weik.io-specific best practices
└── src/
    ├── integration-types-service.ts # Integration types information service
    ├── metadata-service.ts    # Apache Camel metadata service
    ├── yaml-dsl-service.ts    # YAML DSL knowledge service (planned)
    ├── template-service.ts    # Template management service (planned)
    ├── best-practices-service.ts # Best practices enforcement (planned)
    ├── dev-tools-service.ts   # Development tools integration (planned)
    └── local-weikio-service.ts # Local Weik.io management (planned)

Implementation Roadmap

Phase 1: Apache Camel YAML DSL Support

  1. Create YAML DSL Knowledge Base

    • Extract and organize DSL elements from documentation

    • Document syntax rules and constraints

    • Tag elements with metadata for searchability

  2. Build Example Repository

    • Develop basic examples showcasing core concepts

    • Create advanced examples demonstrating complex patterns

    • Index examples with metadata for efficient retrieval

  3. Implement Integration Pattern Library

    • Document common Enterprise Integration Patterns

    • Provide YAML implementations of each pattern

    • Create context-specific variations

  4. Develop Template System

    • Design foundational templates for common scenarios

    • Create parameterization system for customization

    • Include documentation within templates

  5. Add Core MCP Tools

    • learn_yaml_example: Store and index new examples

    • generate_camel_integration: Create YAML based on requirements

    • validate_yaml: Verify syntax and best practices

    • get_yaml_element_help: Provide element documentation

    • list_integration_patterns: Show available patterns

    • get_template: Retrieve integration templates

  6. Develop Debugging Capabilities

    • Create data transformation debugging tools

      • Input/output validators

      • Transformation step visualization

      • Schema compliance checkers

    • Implement common error resolution patterns

    • Design payload examination utilities

    • Build execution flow tracing

  7. Establish Best Practices Framework

    • Document key best practices for integration design

    • Create property placeholder standards with Weik.io Variables

    • Develop event stream patterns for webhook integrations

    • Build best practices enforcement into generation tools

    • Create validation rules to ensure compliance

Phase 2: Weik.io Feature Support

  1. Develop Weik.io Feature Knowledge Base

    • Document MFT capabilities and configuration

    • Create structured documentation for other Weik.io features

    • Establish extensible format for adding new features

  2. Enhance Template System

    • Add Weik.io-specific templates

    • Create hybrid templates showing Camel+Weik.io integration

    • Include best practices for feature selection

  3. Implement Weik.io-specific Tools

    • generate_mft_configuration: Create MFT configurations

    • Tools for other Weik.io features (extensible design)

  4. Add Testing & Deployment Support

    • Test parameter identification

    • Test configuration generation

    • Deployment validation guidance

Extensibility Mechanisms

The implementation should prioritize extensibility to allow future enhancements:

  1. Pluggable Knowledge System

    • Structured file format for adding new knowledge

    • Versioning support for evolving capabilities

  2. Feature Documentation Format

    • Standard schema for documenting Weik.io features

    • Easy addition of new features as they're developed

  3. Template Extension API

    • Clear conventions for adding new templates

    • Parameter definition standards

Technical Implementation Guidelines

Knowledge Base Design

  1. File Format

    • Use JSON/YAML for structured data

    • Maintain clear schemas for each knowledge type

    • Include rich metadata for filtering and search

  2. Example Storage

    • Store examples as complete, valid YAML

    • Annotate with comments for learning purposes

    • Tag with relevant components, patterns, and complexity

Service Implementation

  1. YAML DSL Service

    • Provide indexing and search capabilities

    • Implement validation against DSL rules

    • Support contextual help for elements

  2. Template Service

    • Enable parameter substitution

    • Provide filtering by use case and complexity

    • Support merging of multiple templates

Best Practices Enforcement

  1. Structured Documentation Format

    • Markdown-based best practice documentation

    • Metadata for applicability (integration type, components)

    • Code examples showing correct implementation

    • Common anti-patterns to avoid

  2. Integration Generation Guardrails

    • Default application of best practices in all generated code

    • Template configurations conforming to standards

    • Automatic property placeholder implementation

    • Event stream generation for webhook scenarios

  3. Compliance Checking

    • Static analysis rules for best practice validation

    • Customizable compliance levels (required vs. recommended)

    • Detailed reporting with improvement suggestions

    • Fix suggestions for non-compliant implementations

  4. Extensibility Mechanism

    • Simple format for adding new best practices

    • Version tagging for practice evolution

    • Deprecation mechanism for outdated practices

Debugging System Design

  1. Data Transformation Focus

    • JQ testing environment with sample input/output

    • Step-by-step transformation visualization

    • Common error pattern identification

    • Schema validation against expected formats

  2. Message Flow Debugging

    • Enable tracing through integration points

    • Provide payload inspection at each step

    • Identify potential bottlenecks and failure points

  3. Error Resolution Patterns

    • Maintain database of common errors and resolutions

    • Pattern matching for error diagnostics

    • Suggested fixes based on error signatures

Example Best Practices

To illustrate the level of detail in the best practices framework, here are examples of two key practices:

Property Placeholders with Weik.io Variables

Integrations should externalize all configuration using Weik.io's Variable system rather than hardcoding values:

# ❌ Incorrect: Hardcoded values
- route:
    from:
      uri: "sftp://ftp.example.com:22/incoming"
      parameters:
        username: "ftpuser"
        password: "secret123"
# ✅ Correct: Using Weik.io Variables
- route:
    from:
      uri: "sftp://{{vars.ftp.host}}:{{vars.ftp.port}}/incoming"
      parameters:
        username: "{{vars.ftp.username}}"
        password: "{{vars.ftp.password}}"

Benefits:

  • Environment-specific configurations

  • Improved security (no secrets in code)

  • Centralized management

  • Runtime reconfiguration without redeployment

Event Streams for Webhook Integrations

All webhook-style integrations should implement event streams for replay and inspection:

# ✅ Recommended Pattern
- route:
    from:
      uri: "webhook://orders"
      steps:
        # Log incoming event to stream
        - to:
            uri: "stream:event"
            parameters:
              streamName: "webhook-orders"
              persistent: true
        # Continue with processing
        - process:
            # ... processing steps

Benefits:

  • Ability to replay events for testing

  • Inspection of payloads for debugging

  • Audit trail of received webhooks

  • Recovery mechanism in case of processing failures

External Developer Tools Integration

The MCP server provides seamless integration with popular development and testing tools:

ngrok

  • Automatic tunnel management for local endpoints

  • Configuration of custom domains and authentication

  • Integration with webhook testing workflows

webhook.site

  • Automated endpoint creation and management

  • Payload inspection and analysis

  • Response mocking for simulating external systems

Camel CLI (JBang)

  • Quick component testing without project setup

  • Transformation validation with sample data

  • Route testing with minimal configuration

These tools are integrated directly into the MCP server's capabilities, providing a seamless experience for developers throughout the integration lifecycle.

Local Weik.io Environment

The MCP server provides streamlined management of local Weik.io instances:

Docker Compose Configuration

The MCP server includes a tool called get_docker_compose that provides a ready-to-use Docker Compose configuration for running a local Weik.io environment. The configuration includes:

To use this configuration:

  1. Get the Docker Compose file with get_docker_compose

  2. Save it to a file (e.g., docker-compose.yml)

  3. Run docker-compose up -d to start the environment

  4. Connect to the local instance by adding a profile:

    weikio profiles add "local" "http://backend.localtest.me:8000" "api.key"

  5. Verify the connection with weikio agents ls

Instance Management

  • One-command startup of complete Weik.io environment

  • Basic status reporting

  • Simple reset functionality for clean testing

Development Integration

  • Deploy integrations directly to local instance

  • Test with real-world data using tunneling (ngrok)

  • Rapid iteration between code changes and testing

This simplified approach focuses on developer productivity by providing just the essential controls needed for integration development and testing.

Future Opportunities

  1. Interactive Learning

    • Step-by-step tutorials for common integrations

    • Feedback on user-created integrations

  2. Pattern Detection

    • Analyze existing integrations to identify patterns

    • Suggest optimizations based on best practices

  3. Integration with Weik.io Roadmap

    • Support for new Weik.io features as they're released

    • Alignment with Weik.io product evolution

Development Approach

This project should be implemented with an iterative approach:

  1. Start with core YAML DSL knowledge and simple examples

  2. Add integration patterns and templates

  3. Build tools for generation and validation

  4. Extend with Weik.io-specific features

  5. Enhance with testing and deployment support

Each iteration should deliver standalone value while building toward the complete vision.

Docker Container and CI/CD

The MCP server can be run as a Docker container, with automated builds via GitHub Actions.

Docker Image

The MCP server is containerized using Docker, making it easy to deploy and run in various environments. The Docker image is built on Node.js Alpine for a minimal footprint.

The Docker build process:

  1. Installs .NET 8 SDK and Weikio CLI

  2. Copies all source files into the container

  3. Installs all dependencies (including dev dependencies)

  4. Builds the TypeScript project

  5. Prunes dev dependencies for a smaller final image

  6. Sets up the entry point

The Docker image includes:

  • Node.js 20 (Alpine)

  • .NET 8 SDK

  • Weikio CLI (global tool)

Running the Docker Container

# Pull the latest image
docker pull ghcr.io/weikio/mcp-server:latest

# Run the container
docker run -it ghcr.io/weikio/mcp-server:latest

Building Locally

You can also build and run the Docker image locally:

# Build the image
docker build -t weikio-server .

# Run the container
docker run -it weikio-server

NPM Package

The MCP server is also available as an npm package, making it easy to use with npx. The package is automatically published to npm via GitHub Actions when changes are pushed to the main branch.

Prerequisites

Before using the npm package, ensure you have the following installed:

  1. Node.js (v20 or later)

  2. .NET 8 SDK - Installation instructions

  3. Weikio CLI - Install with:

    dotnet tool install weikio-cli --global --prerelease

Ensure all tools are available in your PATH.

Installation

You can use the package directly with npx without installing it:

npx @weikio/mcp-server

Or install it globally:

npm install -g @weikio/mcp-server

Then run it with:

weikio-mcp-server

Available Tools

12 tools
add_profileC

Add a new Weik.io profile

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesProfile name
urlYesBackend URL
apiKeyYesAPI key

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Add' without disclosing side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is reversible. Minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence, very concise and front-loaded. However, it could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description should explain return values or success indicators. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the outcome of the operation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning, meeting baseline for high coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool adds a new profile, with verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_profiles (read) and apply_config (config). However, it does not explain what a profile is or its significance.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention prerequisites like having a valid context or when to use apply_config instead.

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

apply_configC

Apply a Weik.io configuration file

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filepathYesPath to the YAML configuration file

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the action without disclosing whether applying the config is destructive, requires authentication, or triggers side effects. The impact is unclear.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be expanded slightly to include key behavioral context without losing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the apply process, required permissions, or potential outcomes, leaving the agent underinformed for a configuration-altering tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema has 100% coverage for the 'filepath' parameter, with a description: 'Path to the YAML configuration file'. The tool description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but adds no extra value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Apply a Weik.io configuration file' specifies a clear verb ('Apply') and a specific resource ('Weik.io configuration file'). It is distinct from sibling tools as none other mentions applying configurations, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other sibling tools, such as when to prefer it over 'push_integration' or 'add_profile'. There is no indication of prerequisites or alternatives.

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

get_component_detailsB

Get detailed information about a specific Apache Camel component

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesComponent name

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only states it gets information, but does not disclose return format, side effects, or required permissions.

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?

Single sentence, clear and front-loaded, no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Minimal description for a tool with no annotations or output schema; lacks context on return structure, error handling, or usage scenarios.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema has one parameter 'name' with description 'Component name', coverage 100%; description adds no additional semantics beyond 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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'detailed information about a specific Apache Camel component', distinguishing it from siblings like search_components and get_kamelet_details.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied but not explicit; no guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use.

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

get_docker_composeA

Get a Docker Compose file for setting up a local Weik.io instance

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or dependencies. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 12 words that conveys the action and purpose without any fluff. Every word contributes meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It tells what the tool does but lacks details on the file's contents, format, or when to use it relative to siblings. Given low complexity, this is acceptable but could be improved.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns (a Docker Compose file for a specific setup), which goes beyond the empty 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 tool's function: 'Get a Docker Compose file' with a specific purpose (setting up a local Weik.io instance). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the only one dealing with Docker Compose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer its role from context.

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

get_kamelet_detailsB

Get detailed information about a specific Apache Camel Kamelet

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesKamelet name

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as authentication, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., what happens if kamelet not found). Minimal info.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, and description does not specify what 'detailed information' includes. Missing return format or fields, which is important for an information retrieval tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% for single parameter 'name' described as 'Kamelet name'. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific Apache Camel Kamelet', using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like search_kamelets (search) and get_component_details (components).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_kamelets or get_component_details. Sibling tools exist but are not mentioned.

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

get_supported_integration_typesB

Get information about supported integration types in Weik.io

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get information', implying a read operation, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The description adds minimal value beyond the name.

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 a single sentence of 8 words, highly concise with no unnecessary information. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately summarizes the tool's purpose. However, it could mention the return format or typical output to improve completeness.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. A score of 4 is appropriate by baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'information about supported integration types'. It is specific enough to convey the tool's function, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_agents or list_profiles.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_components or get_component_details. The agent is given no context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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

initialize_integrationB

Initialize a new integration flow with the specified name in the specified directory

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName of the integration flow to create (lowercase, can include hyphens)
directoryYesDirectory where the integration flow should be created (absolute path)

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description mentions 'new' suggesting creation, but it does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is idempotent. Without annotations, the description carries the full burden, and this lack of detail leaves agents uncertain.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the key action and parameters. There is no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the basic purpose and parameters, but for a simple tool, it lacks details about return value, error conditions, or behavior in edge cases. Given no output schema, agents might need more context.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides (lowercase for name, absolute path for directory).

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 verb 'Initialize' and the resource 'integration flow', and specifies the key parameters (name and directory). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like push_integration or add_profile, which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions. For example, it does not indicate whether the directory must exist or what happens if the integration already exists.

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

list_agentsB

List all Weik.io agents

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List all' implies a read-only operation, which is appropriate, but there is no disclosure of pagination behavior, ordering, or potential performance implications. The description is minimally adequate for a simple list tool.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters, though it could benefit from slightly more context about the output.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no input schema and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete but lacks detail about the return format or the nature of agents. Given the simplicity, it is sufficient but not exemplary.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, as there are none. It correctly implies no inputs are required.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List all Weik.io agents' clearly states the action (list) and resource (agents). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like list_profiles. However, it could be improved by briefly defining what constitutes an 'agent' in the Weik.io context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_components or list_profiles. There is no mention of prerequisites, best practices, or exclusions.

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

list_profilesB

List all Weik.io profiles

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses the read-only, non-destructive behavior ('List'), which is adequate for a simple listing tool. However, it does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or result format (e.g., pagination, fields returned). With no annotations, the description carries full burden and is minimally transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly states the action and target, earning its place with maximum conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It conveys the primary function but lacks details about return values, potential errors, or behavior under edge conditions. For a simple list tool, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and the schema coverage is 100%. No further value is needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List all Weik.io profiles', using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('profiles'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_profile' (creation) and other configuration tools. However, it could clarify the scope (e.g., user's profiles vs system-wide) and lacks mention of returns.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose implies usage when a profile list is needed, there is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or when not to use it (e.g., for filtering).

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

push_integrationC

Push an integration to a Weik.io instance

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName of the integration to push (folder name)
directoryYesDirectory containing the integration (absolute path)

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description implies a write operation ('push') but provides no details on side effects, required permissions, failure modes, or what happens if the integration already exists. With no annotations, the description carries full burden and falls short.

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?

A single sentence that is to the point, no redundancy. However, it could be slightly more informative without adding length.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose but lacks behavioral and contextual details that would help an agent use it correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters described, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., it doesn't clarify that 'name' is a folder name or that 'directory' must be an absolute path).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'push' and resource 'integration' to a Weik.io instance, making the tool's function obvious. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_component_details' or 'list_agents' which serve different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions (e.g., whether the instance must be configured, or if there is an alternative for dry runs).

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

search_componentsA

Search for Apache Camel components by name, description, or label

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates the search is by name, description, or label, but does not disclose search behavior (e.g., fuzzy, case-sensitive), limits, pagination, or error handling. Significant gaps remain.

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 sentence that is concise and efficient. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, e.g., by mentioning the result type.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple parameter set (1 param, no output schema), the description is adequate but not complete. It fails to describe the return format (e.g., list of matching components) or behavior like empty results, which would help an agent.

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?

The schema already describes the query parameter, but the description adds value by specifying that the search applies to name, description, or label. This enriches the parameter's meaning beyond the schema description.

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 tool searches for Apache Camel components by name, description, or label, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_component_details and search_kamelets.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for searching but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_component_details for detailed info). No when-not or exclusions are mentioned.

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

search_kameletsB

Search for Apache Camel Kamelets by name, title, or description

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the search fields (name, title, description) but omits details like case sensitivity, partial matching, pagination, or any potential side effects. The tool's read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Every word is meaningful and earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is minimal for a search tool. It does not specify return format (list, object, count), result limits, or pagination. Given the complexity of search tools and lack of output schema, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the behavior.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines 'query' as a string. The description adds meaning by clarifying that the search applies to name, title, or description, which is useful beyond the schema's 'Search query' label. However, this is baseline value given high coverage.

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 tool searches for Apache Camel Kamelets by name, title, or description. It uses a specific verb 'Search' and resource 'Kamelets', distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_kamelet_details' (which retrieves details) and 'search_components' (which searches other entities).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_kamelet_details' for specific kamelets or 'search_components' for other components. No inclusion or exclusion criteria are given.

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. 12 tool updatesv0.1.0
    • First observedadd_profile
    • First observedapply_config
    • First observedget_component_details
    • First observedget_docker_compose
    • First observedget_kamelet_details
    • First observedget_supported_integration_types
    • First observedinitialize_integration
    • First observedlist_agents
    • First observedlist_profiles
    • First observedpush_integration
    • First observedsearch_components
    • First observedsearch_kamelets
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation: profile management (add, list), component/kamelet details and search, integration initialization and push, config application, agent listing, docker compose retrieval, and supported types. No two tools have overlapping purposes; descriptions clearly differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., add_profile, get_component_details, search_components). The convention is uniform across all 12 tools, making the set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count5/5

With 12 tools, the scope is well-balanced. It covers multiple aspects of Weik.io integration (profiles, components, kamelets, integrations, config, agents, Docker support) without being overwhelming or sparse.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core operations: profile CRUD (add/list), component/kamelet retrieval and search, integration initialization and push, config application, and agent listing. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no update/delete for profiles, no integration deletion), but the core workflow for setting up and pushing integrations is complete.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • MCP Integration Suite Server

    1nbuc
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables interaction with SAP Integration Suite for designing, creating, and managing integration artifacts including integration flows, message mappings, packages, and B2B trading partner relationships through AI-powered natural language commands.
    29
    -

  • CI MCP Server

    lemaiwo
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    F
    maintenance
    Enables AI assistants to manage SAP Cloud Integration (CPI) landscapes through natural language by exposing CPI OData APIs as MCP tools.
    11
    MIT

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/weikio/mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server