Convert text to title case with small-word rules, or to sentence case. Pure CPU, instant.
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": "title_case"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Text to convert |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / textAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Text to convert",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "text"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, but the description does add real behavioral context: 'Pure CPU, instant' signals a local, deterministic, non-network, side-effect-free transformation, and 'small-word rules' discloses that conversion is non-trivial (articles/prepositions handled). It stops short of stating the output is returned as a plain string, whether existing capitalization is normalized, or how the sentence-case mode is selected.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the operation comes first and the performance note last. Nothing here is redundant with the schema or title.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter pure function this is close to adequate, but the undefined sentence-case variant is a genuine hole an agent cannot resolve from schema or annotations. With no annotations and no output schema, one more clause on output format and how to trigger each casing mode would make it complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% for the single 'text' parameter, so the schema carries the load and baseline 3 applies. The description adds no format guidance (length limits, Unicode, newlines), and its promise of 'or to sentence case' implies a mode switch that the visible schema does not expose.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Convert text to title case') plus the distinguishing detail of small-word rules, so an agent knows it is not a plain lowercase/uppercase switcher. It does not name or rule out the very similar sibling 'case_convert', leaving that comparison to the agent.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no reference to the near-duplicate siblings 'case_convert' or 'slugify'. The mention of a sentence-case alternative is not accompanied by any instruction on when to choose it or how to request it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.