Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Short Code Generator

ShortCodeGenerator
Read-only

Short Code Generator: Short Code Generator creates custom alphanumeric short codes for vouchers, referral tokens, and redirect slugs. Specify a length, batch count, and character set like numeric, hex, or Base58 to receive an array of random strings. (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": "ShortCodeGenerator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of codes to generate
lengthNoLength of each code
charsetNoCharacter setalphanumeric

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the description's burden is lower, yet it still adds real value: it discloses that the output is an array of random strings and that each call costs 1 credit. The credit cost in particular is behavioral information an agent cannot get from annotations or schema.

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?

Two tight sentences; the purpose is front-loaded and the cost note is efficiently appended. The only waste is the redundant restatement of the title ('Short Code Generator: Short Code Generator creates...').

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?

With an output schema present the description need not explain return values, and it correctly covers purpose, configurable inputs, and credit cost. It is nearly complete for a simple three-parameter generator; only the absence of sibling routing keeps it from full marks.

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 baseline is 3. The description does add some meaning by expanding the otherwise vague 'Character set' schema field into concrete options (numeric, hex, Base58), but it leaves the length/count defaults and any bounds unstated, so the added value is modest.

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 ('creates custom alphanumeric short codes') and grounds it with concrete use cases (vouchers, referral tokens, redirect slugs). It does not explicitly name the sibling generators it competes with (UUIDGenerator, CuidGenerator, ULIDGenerator, PasswordGenerator), so differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 use cases hint at when this tool is appropriate, and the description tells the agent what to configure (length, batch count, character set). However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sibling code/ID generators, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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