Skip to main content
Glama

Word Cloud Generator (word-cloud.net)

generate_wordcloud

Generate a word cloud and return an embeddable URL. Data is sent to word-cloud.net servers for processing only and is not logged or stored.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boldNoUse bold weight
fontNoFont family. Built-in: Arial, Audiowide, Bangers, Black Ops One, Bungee, Caveat, Chewy, Comic Sans MS, Courier New, Creepster, Dancing Script, Fredoka One, Georgia, Great Vibes, Impact, Lobster, Luckiest Guy, MedievalSharp, Montserrat, Nosifer, Open Sans, Orbitron, Oswald, Pacifico, Passion One, Permanent Marker, Righteous, Roboto, Russo One, Satisfy, UnifrakturMaguntia. Or use any Google Font with googleFontsUrl.Impact
maskNoShape mask preset constraining where words are placednone
shapeNoCanvas shapelandscape
wordsYesArray of words with weights. Higher weight = larger text.
maskUrlNoURL to a custom mask image (PNG, JPEG, SVG). Black areas define where words are placed.
gradientNoBackground gradient. Mutually exclusive with backgroundColor.
rotationNoWord rotation modehorizontal-vertical
colorModeNoColor mode: 'palette' uses colorPalette colors, 'bw' is black & white, 'white' is all white textpalette
colorPaletteNoColor palette presetrainbow
customColorsNoCustom hex color values (e.g. ["#ff0000", "#00ff00"]). Overrides colorPalette when provided.
backgroundUrlNoURL to a background image (PNG, JPEG, SVG).
googleFontsUrlNoGoogle Fonts CSS URL for custom fonts (e.g. https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Lobster&display=swap)
backgroundColorNoSolid background hex color (e.g. #1a034f). Omit for transparent. Mutually exclusive with gradient and backgroundPreset.
backgroundPresetNoBuilt-in background image presetNone

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully discloses that data is sent to external servers and is not logged or stored, adding privacy context. However, it omits other behavioral details like network dependency, authentication needs, or failure modes.

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 two concise sentences with key information front-loaded. The first sentence states the primary function and return value; the second provides an important privacy note. No filler or redundancy.

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?

While the schema provides rich detail for all parameters, the description is thin for a complex tool with 15 parameters and no output schema. It does not clarify the URL format, usage examples, or how to select between sibling tools. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 100%, so all 15 parameters already have descriptive definitions in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level information, but this is acceptable because the schema fully documents each parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Generate a word cloud and return an embeddable URL.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that likely return images or SVGs, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus generate_wordcloud_image or generate_wordcloud_svg. It only describes the core function without any context about prerequisites, output format differences, or selection criteria.

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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool generates a word cloud but differs clearly by output format: URL, WebP image, or SVG image. The descriptions explicitly state the return type, so an agent can unambiguously select the appropriate tool for its needs.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the same prefix 'generate_wordcloud' with an optional suffix denoting the output format ('_image', '_svg'). The base name indicates the action, and the suffix differentiates variants, forming a clear and predictable pattern.

Tool Count5/5

With exactly 3 tools, the set is minimal and well-scoped for a word cloud generation service. Each tool serves a distinct output format, and the count feels appropriate for the domain without redundancy or excessive overlap.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the core functionality of generating a word cloud in three common output formats (embed URL, WebP, SVG). This satisfies typical use cases for the stated purpose, and there are no obvious gaps such as missing format options or lifecycle operations.

Resources