redact_pii
Redact PII from text. mode=mask replaces with [REDACTED]; mode=tag uses typed placeholders like [EMAIL].
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | No | mask | |
| text | Yes |
ai-guardrails
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description partially compensates by explaining the output format for each mode (mask vs. tag). However, it does not disclose whether the input text is returned as a new string, whether modification occurs in place, or any limitations of PII detection. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but not rich.
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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every word adds value. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.
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?
The description covers the core behavior and modes but does not explicitly state the return value (e.g., 'returns the redacted text'). It also does not reference sibling tools for comparison, which would enhance completeness. Given the tool's simplicity, the description is nearly complete but has a notable gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides meaningful semantics for the 'mode' parameter with concrete examples, which goes beyond the enum values. The 'text' parameter's purpose is self-evident from the tool name and description, so it is sufficiently explained.
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 function: 'Redact PII from text' with a specific verb and resource. The mode details further clarify the two distinct behaviors, distinguishing it from sibling tools like detect_pii.
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?
The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as detect_pii or full_check. It only explains the modes, not the appropriate context or conditions for invoking the tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a distinct role: hallucination scoring, safety classification, PII detection, combined checks, and redaction. The purpose of full_check as an aggregator is clear, so there is no harmful overlap.
Naming Consistency4/5
Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern in snake_case (check_, detect_, redact_), which is consistent. The outlier full_check uses an adjective modifier but remains intuitive and readable.
Tool Count5/5
With five tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose, covering detection, combined checking, and redaction without overwhelming users or leaving trivial gaps.
Completeness4/5
The core guardrail workflows—hallucination, safety, PII detection, and redaction—are covered, with full_check enabling batch processing. Missing advanced checks like prompt injection are minor gaps rather than critical omissions.