Skip to main content
Glama

AILANG Parse

by io.github.sunholo-data

mcpConvert

Convert a document to another format. Targets: html, md, qmd, docx, pptx, xlsx, odt, odp, ods. input is a file path, a sample_id, an https:// URL, or a gs:// ref (Business tier).

The converted file comes back as base64 in the JSON response rather than written to disk, so decode content to get the bytes. outputPath is accepted but ignored; it stays in the signature because removing it would change the auto-generated MCP tool schema for existing clients.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
apiKeyYes
outputPathYes
outputFormatYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the converted file is returned as base64 in the JSON response, not written to disk, and 'outputPath' is accepted but ignored. This is valuable transparency beyond the schema.

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 concise and well-structured, with two paragraphs that front-load the purpose and targets, then detail the behavior. Every sentence adds value, covering the output format and the 'outputPath' gotcha without extraneous information.

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 explains the return format (base64 in JSON) and the ignored output parameter, which is key for a conversion tool without an output schema. However, it does not specify supported input formats, error handling, or limits, leaving notable gaps for a tool with no annotations and no output schema.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining 'input' (file path, sample_id, URL, gs://), 'outputPath' (ignored), and implicitly 'outputFormat' via the list of target formats. However, 'apiKey' is not explained, though it is self-explanatory.

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 description clearly states the tool converts a document to another format and lists the target formats. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'convertDocument', which likely serves a similar purpose, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 provides context on when to use the tool by listing input types (file path, sample_id, URL, gs://) and notes the Business tier requirement for gs:// refs. It implies usage but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like 'convertDocument'.

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

All AILANG Parse toolsInspect
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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes: parse, convert, estimate, formats, auth, auth-poll, account, upload, and feedback. The main ambiguity is that editDocument with an empty delta array behaves like a parse, overlapping with mcpParse.

Naming Consistency2/5

Seven tools share a useful mcp prefix with PascalCase, but editDocument and getUploadUrl are camelCase and submit_feedback is snake_case. The casing and verb-style inconsistencies make the tool set feel less coherent than its overall design suggests.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is a well-scoped size for this domain: authentication, account, upload, formatting, estimation, parsing, editing, conversion, and feedback are each represented. No tool feels redundant or like filler.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the key parse workflow: get an API key, upload, estimate, parse, edit, convert, and check supported formats. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit API-key revoke action and some output/workflow steps being delegated to the SDK/CLI.

Resources