Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Roman Numeral Converter

RomanNumeralConverter
Read-only

Roman Numeral Converter: Roman Numeral Converter is a bidirectional tool for converting between Arabic numbers (1-3999) and Roman numerals. It provides detailed breakdowns of the conversion process. (Cost: 1 credit)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "RomanNumeralConverter"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
romanNoThe Roman numeral to convert to a number
numberNoThe number to convert to Roman numerals

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: the numeric domain cap of 3999 and a stated cost of 1 credit, plus that it produces a step-by-step breakdown. It does not address what happens with invalid input or out-of-range values.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening redundantly restates the title verbatim ('Roman Numeral Converter: Roman Numeral Converter is...'). After that the sentences are efficient, but the duplication wastes the most prominent position in the description.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and cost plus range are covered. The missing piece is the input-selection rule for a 2-parameter, 0-required tool, which is the main thing an agent could get wrong when invoking it.

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 documents both parameters, and the description's 1-3999 range adds a bit of constraint beyond it. However, with zero required parameters, the key semantic question of whether 'roman' and 'number' are mutually exclusive is not addressed in either place.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('converting between Arabic numbers and Roman numerals') and bounds the domain to 1-3999. It does not differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as RomanNumeralMath or NumberBaseConverter, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to pick this over RomanNumeralMath or NumberBaseConverter, and critically no statement that exactly one of the two optional parameters should be supplied per call. The agent must infer the calling convention entirely.

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

All APIVerve toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources