HiLLM NAV is an open-source navigation and community platform for AI tools, Skills, MCP servers, and Prompts. Includes security scanning and assessment infrastructure.
This server exhibits severe definition quality gaps across all dimensions. Tool names lack action verbs (scan_skill, chat_completions, health_live, health_ready, ensureUniqueSkillSlug are inconsistent and vague). Descriptions are present but minimal (10-50 chars for most tools). Input schemas are visible but lack proper type constraints and validation guidance. No output schemas documented. Error handling is absent from descriptions. The server appears to be a Next.js application exposing internal services rather than a proper MCP tool server, tool definitions are inferred from file paths and brief descriptions, not explicitly registered with full schemas.
Gateway endpoint for LLM chat completions used by the security scanner for AI-powered vulnerability assessment
Generates a unique URL slug for a Skill, avoiding collisions with existing skills
Liveness probe endpoint for container orchestration
Readiness probe endpoint that verifies scanner configuration and model availability
Scans a Skill package (ZIP archive) for security vulnerabilities and issues using aig-skill-scan
Tool names lack consistent action verbs. 'scan_skill' is acceptable, but 'chat_completions', 'health_live', 'health_ready', and 'ensureUniqueSkillSlug' violate verb_noun convention. LLMs cannot infer intent from these names alone.
No output schemas documented for any tool. LLMs cannot plan downstream calls or extract required fields. Responses are unstructured.
Descriptions are too brief (10-50 chars). Baseline for A+ tools is 50-200 chars. Current descriptions lack context for when/why to use each tool. E.g., 'Liveness probe endpoint' does not explain what an LLM should do with it.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 30 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
No error handling guidance in any tool description. LLMs have no recovery path if a call fails. E.g., scan_skill provides no guidance on retryability or failure modes.
Tool definitions appear inferred from file paths and brief descriptions rather than explicitly registered with full MCP schemas. No evidence of proper tool registration with input/output schemas in the source code provided.