North korean dictionary(working)
Server Details
North korean dictionary(working)
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 3.5/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one extracts multiple terms from a text, the other searches for a specific term. No overlap.
Both tools use snake_case and follow a verb_noun pattern ('extract_and_define', 'search_term'), consistent and predictable.
Only 2 tools for a dictionary service; while functional for basic needs, more tools like listing all terms or adding entries would be expected.
Missing essential operations: no way to list all terms, add new entries, update, or delete. The surface is limited to extraction and search.
Available Tools
2 toolsextract_and_defineAInspect
텍스트 본문에서 북한 용어를 자동으로 추출하고 그 뜻을 사전에서 매칭하여 반환합니다.
Args:
text: 북한 용어를 식별할 본문 원문 텍스트
field: 필터링할 용어 분야 (옵션, 예: '음식', '생활' 등)
csv_path: 사전 csv 파일 경로 (기본값: 북한용어사전.csv)
Returns:
{용어: 설명} 형식의 파이썬 딕셔너리
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | ||
| field | No | ||
| csv_path | No | 북한용어사전.csv |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states extraction and return of a dictionary, but lacks details on side effects, authentication needs, error handling, or edge cases (e.g., empty text, missing CSV).
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?
Description is concise with Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the main action and uses efficient language. Slightly verbose due to Korean but no wasted sentences.
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?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers basic functionality but omits important context like authentication, file system access (for CSV), and performance considerations. Adequate but with gaps.
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?
Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining each parameter: text as source text, field as optional filter with examples, csv_path as default path. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.
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?
Description clearly states the tool extracts North Korean terms from input text and returns matched definitions from a dictionary. The verb 'extract_and_define' is specific, and the description distinguishes it from sibling 'search_term' by focusing on extraction from text rather than searching.
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?
The description provides parameter details (Args section) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling 'search_term' or any exclusions. Usage context is implied but not directly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_termBInspect
특정 어휘를 지정하여 북한 용어사전에서 개별적으로 검색합니다.
Args:
query: 검색할 북한 용어 (부분 일치 지원)
csv_path: 사전 csv 파일 경로
Returns:
{용어: 설명} 형식의 파이썬 딕셔너리
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| csv_path | No | 북한용어사전.csv |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description mentions partial match and return format (dictionary). With no annotations, the description carries the burden, but it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication needs, or limitations. Adequate for a simple search tool.
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?
Description is concise and front-loaded with the main action. The Args/Returns section provides clear structure. Could be slightly more optimized but no waste.
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 two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description explains input, output format, partial match, and default path. It is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.
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 0%, so description compensates by explaining both parameters in Korean, including the default value for csv_path. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.
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?
Description clearly states it searches a North Korean term dictionary individually with partial match support. It identifies the action (search) and resource (dictionary), but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'extract_and_define'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tool. The description only mentions 'individual search' without context of when it's appropriate or when to use alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!