Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Everyday DevTools MCP

Everyday DevTools MCP

by Deependra12349
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

password_generate

Generate cryptographically secure random passwords with configurable length (8–128 characters) and optional symbols. Use it to create strong credentials for accounts, services, and test environments.

Instructions

Generate a strong random password (cryptographically secure).

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": "password_generate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lengthNo
symbolsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does add one meaningful behavioral claim — cryptographic security — which reassures about randomness quality. However, it says nothing about how the value is returned, whether it is displayed in plaintext, or any entropy/character-set behavior beyond the defaults.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, correctly starting with the verb. Its brevity is appropriate, though it borders on under-specification rather than tight precision.

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?

For a simple, safe generation tool with no output schema or annotations, this is close to adequate — the core action and security property are stated. It falls short by omitting any mention of the two configurable options and what the caller receives back.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for two parameters, so the description should compensate but instead mentions neither 'length' nor 'symbols'. The parameter names and defaults in the schema are self-explanatory enough to avoid a 1, but no added meaning is provided (e.g., allowed length bounds, what disabling symbols yields).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Generate a strong random password') with a clear distinguishing qualifier ('cryptographically secure'), which separates it from siblings like uuid_generate or hash_text. It does not explicitly name a sibling, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives, no preconditions, no note about when a UUID or hash would be more appropriate. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and one sentence.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools