Misar.Blog MCP Server

Suggest titles from draft text

suggest_titles

Read-only

Generate 5 title options FROM AN EXISTING DRAFT, derived from what the article actually says.

Pick between the two title tools by what you have in hand: use this one when the text exists and should drive the headline. Use generate_title_seo when you are starting from a topic or keyword, or want titles aimed at specific search terms — this tool takes no keyword input at all.

Nothing is saved and the article is not retitled; apply a choice with update_article. Requires an API key and consumes AI credits per call. Generative, so repeated calls return different titles. Needs at least 20 characters of text to work from.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	The article text to draw titles from, plain or Markdown, 20-8000 characters. More of the real draft yields better-fitting titles than a summary.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds context beyond annotations: nothing is saved, article not retitled, requires API key and consumes AI credits, generative so repeated calls differ, needs 20+ characters. Complements readOnlyHint and idempotentHint=false without contradiction.

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?

Front-loaded with core purpose, followed by tool-selection guidance, side effects, and requirements. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: covers behavior, side effects, prerequisites (API key, credits, minimum text), and output count (5 titles). Also addresses lifecycle (not applied automatically).

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% for the single parameter, but description adds useful quality guidance: 'More of the real draft yields better-fitting titles than a summary.' This goes beyond schema's basic min/max constraints.

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?

Clearly states it generates 5 title options from an existing draft, derived from what the article actually says. Explicitly distinguishes from generate_title_seo by emphasizing draft-based vs keyword-based input.

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 instructs when to use this tool versus generate_title_seo based on what the user has in hand. Also notes that a choice can be applied via update_article, giving concrete next steps.

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

All Misar.Blog MCP Server 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools mostly map to clearly distinct resources and actions, with good behavioral separation between create_draft, publish_article, and update_article, and between the two title-generating tools. Some naming choices are still slightly misleading, such as get_series returning the full collection rather than a single series, and generate_cover_image references a non-existent upload_image tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clean lowercase verb_noun pattern, including create_*, get_*, list_*, and add_* names. Notable exceptions are upgrade, a bare verb that also mixes read and mutate behaviors, and get_series, which functions more like a list than a get.

Tool Count3/5

23 tools is in the heavy range for an MCP server, exceeding the ideal 3-15 span. That said, the tools do span legitimate blogging concerns such as articles, reactions, series, newsletters, analytics, and AI assistance, so the count feels broad rather than padded.

Completeness2/5

The surface covers article creation, reading, updating, and publishing, but there is no delete or unpublish for articles/drafts, no way to remove an article from a series, and no update/delete for series. The dangling reference to upload_image in generate_cover_image also suggests a missing tool, and agents will hit dead ends trying to undo publication or remove content.

Resources

Need Help?