TextToolkit

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

generate_uuid

Generate universally unique identifiers (UUIDs) with support for versions 1, 4, 5, and nil. Choose the UUID version, specify namespace and name for v5, and optionally output uppercase.

Instructions

Generate a UUID

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "generate_uuid"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`version`	No	UUID version to generate	v4
`namespace`	No	Namespace for v5 UUID (required for v5)
`name`	No	Name for v5 UUID (required for v5)
`uppercase`	No	Whether to return the UUID in uppercase

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only says 'Generate a UUID' without disclosing randomness, determinism, side effects, or any important constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no waste. It could be slightly expanded for context, but it is efficient and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It provides no overview of version differences, required parameters for v5, or return format, leaving significant 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%, and the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Generate a UUID' clearly states the action and output. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like validate_uuid or other generation tools, but the name itself is specific enough.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as validate_uuid. No information on version selection or prerequisites.

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