Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Spell Checker

SpellChecker
Read-only

Spell Checker: Spell Checker flags misspelled words in submitted English text and generates correction suggestions. It counts total spelling errors, lists possible replacements for each mistaken word, and can return the text with the top suggestions applied, plus on paid plans the character offsets of every misspelling. (Cost: 10 credits)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "SpellChecker"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesThe text to check the spelling of
offsetsNoInclude the start and end character position of every occurrence of each misspelled word
autocorrectNoInclude correctedText, the submitted text with each misspelling replaced by its first suggestion

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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-destructive read operation, but the description adds meaningful behavior: it counts total errors, lists replacements, can return corrected text, and restricts character offsets to paid plans. The 10-credit cost is also disclosed. It does not cover rate limits or failure behavior, but it goes well beyond the 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 purpose and main behaviors are front-loaded in a compact paragraph. The cost note is separated cleanly at the end, and there is little wasted wording, though the repeated 'Spell Checker: Spell Checker' is slightly redundant.

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?

For a simple, read-only spell-checking tool with an output schema and full parameter descriptions, this is largely complete. It covers cost, paid-plan restrictions, and output behavior, but it omits details such as text-length limits or whether credits are charged on error.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by noting that character offsets are available only on paid plans and that autocorrect applies suggestions. There is a minor ambiguity: the schema says the first suggestion is applied, while the description says 'top suggestions' are applied.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it flags misspelled words in English text and generates correction suggestions. It is easy to distinguish from a generic grammar tool by the spelling focus, but it does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings such as GrammarCheck or DidYouMean.

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?

Usage is implied by 'submitted English text' and the spelling-correction framing, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over GrammarCheck or DidYouMean. The paid-plan note for offsets and the credit cost are useful context, though they are not routing guidance.

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