mdmagic

validate_markdown

Read-onlyIdempotent

Pre-flight markdown validation BEFORE conversion. Catches malformed tables (mismatched pipes), unclosed code fences, broken task lists, and unsupported syntax. Returns a green/amber/red status plus the detected markdown features.

CALL THIS PROACTIVELY when:

The user is about to convert a long document (>5 pages) — validating first is cheap; running a doomed conversion costs credits
The user reports a previous conversion produced broken output
You generated the markdown yourself and want to verify it's clean before spending credits

Returns: status (green=safe, amber=minor issues, red=will likely break), detected features (tables, code blocks, task lists, math), and a human-readable message.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	Markdown content to validate
`filename`	No	Optional filename label for the response (defaults to 'content.md')

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false). The description adds behavioral context such as return status (green/amber/red) and specific issues caught, which is helpful beyond annotations.

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 front-loaded with purpose and well-structured with bullet points for usage and return format, though slightly verbose. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given two parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema but return format detailed, and annotations provided, the description is complete. It clearly differentiates from sibling 'convert_document' and covers required 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%, and the description does not add significant detail beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 applies as per scoring guidelines.

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 validates markdown before conversion, using a specific verb 'validate' and resource 'markdown', and distinguishes from sibling 'convert_document' by emphasizing it's a pre-flight check.

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?

The description explicitly lists when to call proactively (long documents, previous conversion failures, self-generated markdown) and implies it's a cheap alternative to a doomed conversion, providing clear context for usage.

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

All mdmagic tools Inspect

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

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function: credit management, conversion, estimation, template listing/details/recommendation, validation, and settings. Even the three list tools are clearly differentiated by scope (all, built-in, custom). No ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., check_credit_balance, list_all_templates, validate_markdown). No mixing of styles or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the surface is well-scoped for a document conversion server. Each tool addresses a necessary step in the conversion workflow without being overengineered or sparse.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle: credit checks, cost estimation, markdown validation, template discovery (all/built-in/custom), details, recommendations, conversion, and default settings. No obvious gaps for the intended use case.

Resources

Need Help?