Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OneSimpleAPI

by com.onesimpleapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

POST /api/readability

api_post_readability
Destructive

Analyze text for readability scores, reading time, word count, and sentiment analysis Uses the OneSimpleAPI API (https://onesimpleapi.com/docs), with the same permissions, credits and storage. Supply API parameters in query or body. This tool always uses POST; do not supply method. Outputs preserve HTTP status, headers and JSON/text/base64 body; redirects are returned without following them.

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": "api_post_readability"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoAPI request body. Nested objects, arrays, HTML, base64 data and all API options retain their original meaning.
pathNo
filesNoMultipart uploads keyed by API field name (for example pdf). Supply file_name, base64 bytes and optional mime_type. Uploads use the existing API file validators.
queryNoURL query parameters. Sensitive API options must be in body as documented by the API.
headersNoAPI request headers such as Idempotency-Key, Range and If-None-Match. Authentication and transport headers are managed by the connection.
content_typeNoDefaults to application/json, or multipart/form-data when files are supplied.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses that credits/permissions/storage are inherited from OneSimpleAPI, that the tool is always POST, that the full HTTP status, headers and body are preserved, and that redirects are returned unfollowed — genuinely useful transport behavior. It does not explain the destructiveHint=true from the annotations (what, if anything, is mutated or consumed), which is the main remaining gap.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, which is good, but the second half is dense run-on boilerplate shared across all api_post_* endpoints and the first sentence is missing terminal punctuation, blurring where purpose ends and generic transport rules begin.

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 6 parameters, nested objects and no output schema, the description adequately compensates by describing what the response carries (status, headers, JSON/text/base64 body) and how payloads are supplied. The unexplained destructive annotation is the one thing an agent would still want clarified.

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 83%, so the schema already documents body.text, body.output, query.text, files and content_type. The description only adds that parameters may go in query or body and that method must not be supplied, which is marginal value over the structured fields.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource plus the concrete outputs (readability scores, reading time, word count, sentiment), so an agent immediately knows what this endpoint does. It does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling, but the resource is naturally distinct from the other api_post_* endpoints.

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 description states how to call it (POST only, do not supply method, put parameters in query or body) but never states when to choose it or when not to; there are no conditions, prerequisites, or named alternatives. Usage is only implied by the subject matter.

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

All OneSimpleAPI 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