Reverse a string character-by-character. Unicode-aware — handles emoji and combining characters correctly using Array.from on the iterator.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Text to reverse. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| output | Yes | Reversed text, Unicode-safe. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context about Unicode handling and implementation ('using Array.from on the iterator'), which goes beyond annotation information.
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?
The description is concise, two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place; the implementation detail is relevant but not excessive.
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 tool's simplicity, one well-described parameter, existing output schema, and strong annotations, the description fully covers what an agent needs to know for correct invocation and result interpretation.
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 100% with the parameter description 'Text to reverse.' The tool description adds context about how the text is processed (character-by-character, Unicode-aware), but this does not significantly augment the schema-provided meaning.
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?
The description clearly states the action ('Reverse a string') and resource ('string'), with additional specificity ('character-by-character'). It distinguishes from sibling text tools like case-converter and sort-lines by the unique verb and scope.
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 implies when to use this tool, particularly for Unicode-aware reversal ('handles emoji and combining characters correctly'), which sets expectations for usage. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the tool's singular function makes that less critical.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes. However, 'hex-to-rgb' is redundant with 'color-converter', which already handles hex-to-RGB conversion, causing potential confusion.
Names follow a consistent lowercase-with-hyphens style, but vary in pattern (e.g., 'angle-converter', 'average-calculator', 'dedup-lines'). One tool ('internal-do-not-call') deviates from the descriptive norm.
With 46 tools, the server is heavily populated. Many converters could be merged into a generic unit converter, and there is redundancy, making the surface unnecessarily large for a single server.
The server covers a broad range of utility domains: converters, text processing, math, cryptography, etc. Minor redundancies exist (e.g., hex-to-rgb vs color-converter), but the set is otherwise comprehensive.
