x402-readme-gen
Readme Gen: Readme Gen
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | No | Input to process | |
| label | No | Label to process | |
| labels | No | Labels to process | |
| content | No | Content to process |
minia2a-mcp
by uk.minia2a
TDQS
D1.4/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, side effects, output shape, or required inputs. It states only 'Readme Gen: Readme Gen' and reveals nothing beyond the name.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely short, but it is under-specified rather than usefully concise. A single tautological sentence earns no structural credit because it contains no substantive information to front-load.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no annotations, no output schema, and four uninformative parameters, this tool lacks nearly all operational context. The description fails to cover input format, expected output, required fields, side effects, or anything needed to invoke it correctly.
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 the baseline of 3 applies even though the description adds no parameter information. However, the schema descriptions are generic phrases like 'Input to process' and do not explain what input, label, labels, or content mean for README generation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description is 'Readme Gen: Readme Gen', which simply restates the tool name and provides no verb, resource, or operation detail. It cannot be distinguished from sibling tools like x402-ai-readme based on this text.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. An agent has no basis for deciding when to invoke this tool instead of the many related readme/generation tools in the sibling list.
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
D1.6/5.0
Disambiguation1/5
The tool set is saturated with near-duplicates and synonyms: character-count vs char-count, clamp vs clamp-value, is-abundant vs is-abundant-num vs is-abundant-number, and fetch vs browser-scrape vs web-scrape vs text-scrape. Generic names like 'difference', 'normalize', 'range', and 'partition' make the boundaries even harder for an agent to determine.
Naming Consistency2/5
Most tools share a x402- kebab-case prefix, but the set mixes noun-only names (math, hash, prime, time), verb-first names (get_stats, find, validate), auto-generated names (x402-publish-1787853294312-base-account), and inconsistent variants like temp vs temperature vs temperature-convert. This is not a coherent verb_noun convention despite the common prefix.
Tool Count1/5
1677 tools is an extreme count that creates selection paralysis and makes coherent agent use impractical. A utility or marketplace server at this scale needs sub-services or namespacing rather than a flat tool list.
Completeness2/5
The surface has broad token coverage across many utility categories, but the marketplace aspect is incomplete: service_discovery and get_stats exist, yet there are no generic publish, update, delete, or account-management operations. Utility families also contain redundant variants without clear completion or lifecycle structure.