Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Word Search Generator

WordSearchGenerator
Read-only

Word Search Generator: Word Search Generator is a word search API that creates customizable word search puzzles with configurable grid size, word placement, and difficulty levels. (Cost: 2 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": {
      "words": "<words>"
    },
    "name": "WordSearchGenerator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sizeNoGrid size
imageNoSet to true to generate a downloadable puzzle image
wordsYesArray of words to hide in the puzzle (3-20 words)
difficultyNoDifficulty level (affects word directions)medium
solutionImageNoSet to true to generate a downloadable solution image

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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the credit cost (2 credits per call) and mentions cost-relevant configurability, but it does not explain whether image generation is synchronous, what is returned when 'image' or 'solutionImage' are set, or any rate/limit behavior beyond price.

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?

One sentence plus a cost tag, front-loaded and free of padding. It does waste a few words restating the title twice ('Word Search Generator: Word Search Generator is...'), but the total volume is appropriate.

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?

With a full schema and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, so the core contract is covered. What is missing is differentiation from the many other puzzle/word generators and any note about how the downloadable image options change the result.

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%, so all five parameters are already documented in the schema; the baseline of 3 applies. The description's mention of 'grid size' and 'difficulty levels' maps to real parameters, but 'word placement' corresponds to no parameter and adds a slightly misleading expectation.

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 'creates customizable word search puzzles' -- and names the knobs (grid size, word placement, difficulty). It does not differentiate from generator siblings such as CrosswordGenerator or WordScrambleGenerator, but an agent can still tell what this tool produces.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no reference to any alternative tool. The only usage-adjacent information is the credit cost, which is a pricing constraint rather than a selection criterion.

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