kurdish-tts-stt

Server Details

Kurdish (Sorani & Kurmanji) text-to-speech & speech-to-text — 664 AI voices. API key required.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.

Status: Healthy
Last Tested: 2026-09-05 21:30
Transport: Streamable HTTP
URL

Available Tools

5 tools

list_dialectsList Kurdish dialectsAInspect

List the supported Kurdish dialects and their scripts. Static capability descriptor — costs nothing.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It explicitly discloses that the tool is static and 'costs nothing', implying no side effects or changes. For a simple listing tool, this is sufficient transparency.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two concise sentences. The first states the core purpose, the second adds the static/cost-free nature. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple static listing tool with one fully-documented parameter, the description plus schema provides complete context. No output schema is expected, and the tool's simplicity means no further details are needed.

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?

The only parameter (context) is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional semantics about the parameter, but the schema already handles it, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'List the supported Kurdish dialects and their scripts' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle voices, transcription, and speech synthesis. The added 'Static capability descriptor' further clarifies its role.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'Static capability descriptor — costs nothing' provides clear context that this is a lightweight, read-only tool for discovering dialects/scripts. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though sibling tools are naturally distinct.

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

list_voicesList Kurdish TTS voicesAInspect

List available Kurdish text-to-speech voices. Returns speaker ids (e.g. sorani_1, kurmanji_236) to use with synthesize_speech. Free metadata call — no credits consumed.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`dialect`	No	Filter by dialect.
`model_version`	No	Voice catalog. v3 is the compatibility default; v4 has up to 664 voices; v5 is the 21-voice curated catalog.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it discloses the cost/billing trait ('no credits consumed') and the return essence (speaker ids in a predictable format). For a simple read-only listing tool this is solid, though it omits minor traits like pagination or behavior when a filter matches nothing.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it does, what it returns and how to use it, and its cost profile. No redundancy, no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema exists, the description compensates reasonably by naming the return value (speaker ids) and giving format examples. Gaps are minor: it does not describe the full response structure or how the optional filters shape results, but for a lightweight metadata listing the essential information is present.

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 the baseline of 3 applies; dialect and model_version are already well documented in the schema. The description adds only marginal value via the id-format examples, which hint at dialect-prefixed speaker ids but do not meaningfully elaborate the parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List available Kurdish text-to-speech voices') and reinforces scope with concrete return examples (sorani_1, kurmanji_236). The tie to synthesize_speech as the consumer helps differentiate it from siblings like list_dialects and the transcription tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Clearly establishes the context: call this before synthesize_speech to obtain valid speaker ids, and the 'Free metadata call' phrasing signals a no-cost discovery path. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the closest sibling list_dialects or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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

start_streaming_transcriptionStart live Kurdish transcription sessionAInspect

Start a live streaming speech-to-text session. WARNING: calling this immediately consumes one streaming session from your STT plan quota — only call it when you are ready to connect. Returns a websocket_url: open it, stream PCM16 mono 16kHz audio chunks, send {"type": "finalize"} to flush and {"type": "done"} to close. Session duration is limited by plan.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`dialect`	Yes	Dialect that will be spoken.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses important behavioral traits: immediate quota consumption, return of a websocket_url, required streaming protocol (PCM16 mono 16kHz), and session duration limits. It also warns about the side effect of consuming quota, making the tool's behavior highly transparent.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, the second is a critical warning, and the third conveys necessary protocol details. Every sentence adds unique value with no fluff or redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool is complex (live streaming), and the description covers the key aspects: return value (websocket_url), data format (PCM16 mono 16kHz), and control messages (finalize/done). However, it does not specify what the websocket will send back (e.g., transcription events), which would be useful given no output schema. Still, it is mostly complete for an agent to start using the tool.

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 both parameters (dialect, context) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add extra meaning for these parameters; it focuses on the overall session behavior, not parameter semantics. Thus the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's action ('Start a live streaming speech-to-text session') and resource, and the title adds 'Kurdish', making it specific. It is distinct from siblings like transcribe_audio, which presumably handles non-live audio, and from list_dialects/synthesize_speech, so 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'only call it when you are ready to connect' due to quota consumption. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the warning and focus on live streaming imply appropriate usage, warranting a 4 rather than a 5.

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

synthesize_speechKurdish text to speechAInspect

Convert Kurdish text (Sorani or Kurmanji) to speech audio. Requires a TTS API key; characters are billed against your plan. Max 600 characters per call over MCP — for longer texts call POST https://www.kurdishtts.com/api/tts-proxy directly (binary WAV, higher plan limits). Note: speed is caller-facing (higher = faster).

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	Kurdish text to synthesize.
`speed`	No	Playback speed, higher = faster. Default 1.
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`speaker_id`	Yes	Voice id from list_voices, e.g. sorani_1 or kurmanji_236. Dialect is derived from the prefix.
`model_version`	No	Voice catalog and plan entitlement. Default v3; every option renders on V5, and explicit v5 requires a paid API plan.
`include_timestamps`	No	Return JSON with word-level timestamps and base64 audio instead of audio content.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure and does a solid job: it reveals API key requirements, billing implications, the character limit, the direct-endpoint alternative, and the caller-facing speed semantics. It does not state the exact output format for normal calls, but the overall risk profile is well disclosed.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by constraints, billing, and a speed clarification. Every sentence contributes useful information with no repetition or filler.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key operational concerns: authentication, cost, length limits, fallback for longer inputs, and speed semantics. It could go slightly further by stating the normal output format, but the include_timestamps parameter already hints that the default is audio content, so the description is reasonably complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds some context around the character limit and speed interpretation, but it does not substantially enhance what the schema already says about individual parameters like speaker_id, context, model_version, or include_timestamps.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Convert Kurdish text (Sorani or Kurmanji) to speech audio.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from the transcription and voice-listing siblings and states the dialects covered.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives concrete usage context: requires a TTS API key, charges characters to the plan, and enforces a 600-character MCP limit with a direct API fallback for longer texts. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like transcribe_audio, but the purpose and limits make the intended use clear.

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

transcribe_audioKurdish speech to textAInspect

Transcribe Kurdish audio (Sorani or Kurmanji) to text. Requires an STT API key; usage is metered per audio minute against your plan. Max 4MB of decoded audio over MCP — for larger files call POST https://www.kurdishtts.com/api/stt-proxy directly (multipart upload).

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`dialect`	Yes	Dialect spoken in the audio.
`filename`	No	Original filename, used to infer the format. Default audio.wav.
`mime_type`	No	Audio MIME type. Default audio/wav.
`audio_base64`	Yes	Base64-encoded audio file (WAV, MP3, FLAC, OGG or M4A).

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the API key requirement, metered billing, and the 4MB limit—key operational traits beyond the basic function. It does not mention return format or error behavior, but the disclosed constraints are meaningful.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, key requirement/billing, and size limitation with fallback. The content is front-loaded and free of filler.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers critical operational context (auth, metering, size limit). It stops short of describing return values or when to choose streaming over batch, but for a transcription tool it provides a solid operational picture.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already explains (e.g., audio_base64, dialect, context). It does not need to because the schema is thorough.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb+resource: 'Transcribe Kurdish audio (Sorani or Kurmanji) to text.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like synthesize_speech (opposite direction) and start_streaming_transcription (streaming vs. file-based).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides concrete usage context: it requires an STT API key, is metered per minute, and has a 4MB size limit. It also names an explicit alternative for larger files (direct API call). However, it does not contrast with the sibling start_streaming_transcription, so some guidance gap remains.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

2 tool updatesSep 4, 2026

Changedlist_voices2 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / model_version / description

Previous value: -"Voice catalog version. v4 (default) has 664 voices."New value: +"Voice catalog. v3 is the compatibility default; v4 has up to 664 voices; v5 is the 21-voice curated catalog."

changedInput schema / properties / model_version / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "v3",
-  "v4"
-]New value: +[
+  "v3",
+  "v4",
+  "v5"
+]

Changedsynthesize_speech2 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / model_version / description

Previous value: -"TTS model. Default v3; v4 requires a plan with v4 access."New value: +"Voice catalog and plan entitlement. Default v3; every option renders on V5, and explicit v5 requires a paid API plan."

changedInput schema / properties / model_version / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "v3",
-  "v4"
-]New value: +[
+  "v3",
+  "v4",
+  "v5"
+]

5 tool updatesAug 10, 2026
- First observedlist_dialects
- First observedlist_voices
- First observedstart_streaming_transcription
- First observedsynthesize_speech
- First observedtranscribe_audio

Frequently Asked Questions

Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.

Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
- GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such as io.github.acme/server also needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.
- HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
- DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.

The HTTP ownership file has this structure:

{
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
  "claim": "glama_claim_..."
}

Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.

If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.

For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Related MCP Connectors

ElevenLabs C
io.github.mcp-dir
ElevenLabs in natural language: generate speech in any language, create and manage voices, compose m
Text-to-Speech Speech Processing Audio Processing
1551
transcribe
com.transcribevideototext
Transcribe audio & video to text for AI agents: 100+ languages, speaker labels, webhooks.
Speech Processing Audio Processing Multimedia Processing
2
tts A
com.brainiall
Hosted pay-per-use TTS: 54 neural voices, 9 languages incl. Brazilian Portuguese. $10 free credits.
Text-to-Speech Audio Processing
32
Speech AI - Pronunciation, STT & TTS A
io.github.fasuizu-br
Pronunciation scoring, speech-to-text, and text-to-speech for language learning
Text-to-Speech Speech Processing Audio Processing
2

Related MCP Servers

Advanced TTS MCP Server
Text-to-Speech Multimedia Processing Audio Processing
samihalawa
A
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
Provides high-quality text-to-speech synthesis with 10 natural voices, emotion control, and dynamic pacing for professional applications requiring expressive speech output.
Updated a year ago (2025-06-25 06:17 UTC)
5
2
MIT
firered-tts
Text-to-Speech Speech Processing Audio Processing
taral14
F
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Local multilingual TTS (24 languages incl. Ukrainian) with zero-shot voice cloning, voice design, and speech editing via HTTP API and MCP server.
Updated 15 days ago (2026-08-21 19:05 UTC)
3
-
midasheng-gen-mcp
Audio Processing Speech Processing AI & Machine Learning
sandraschi
A
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Generates coherent mixed audio scenes (speech, music, SFX, ambience) from text using an LLM-driven model, with speech in 9 languages and emotion control.
Updated 17 days ago (2026-08-19 10:50 UTC)
1
Apache 2.0
brainiall-tts-mcp
Text-to-Speech Audio Processing
fasuizu-br
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
Hosted text-to-speech MCP server for AI agents with 54 neural voices in 9 languages, including Brazilian Portuguese. Pay-per-use API, no GPU or subscriptions needed.
Updated a month ago (2026-08-11 04:48 UTC)
MIT

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function: dialect discovery, voice listing, TTS synthesis, batch STT, and streaming STT. Even the two list_* tools have clearly differentiated outputs (language/script vs speaker IDs), leaving no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: list_dialects, list_voices, start_streaming_transcription, synthesize_speech, transcribe_audio. No mixed conventions or irregular naming.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a TTS/STT service, covering metadata (dialects, voices) and core operations (synthesis, batch transcription, streaming transcription) without bloat or thinness.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers TTS (synthesize_speech), STT in both batch and streaming forms, and necessary metadata for dialect and voice selection. The redirect for large payloads to the direct API is a sensible design choice, not a gap.

Resources

Need Help?