Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
publicsofttools-mcp

publicsofttools-mcp

by DrEjazAhmed
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

generate_hash

Generate cryptographic hashes (MD5, SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-384, SHA-512) for any text input in a single API call.

Instructions

Generate cryptographic hashes for any text. Returns MD5, SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512 in a single call.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "generate_hash"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to hash

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals the output includes five hash algorithms, but does not mention performance, security, or side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Single sentence efficiently states action, resource, and output. Every word is necessary, no waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the single required parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and returns. No missing information for this simple tool.

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 coverage is 100%, with the parameter description 'Text to hash' already present. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Generate' and resource 'cryptographic hashes for any text', listing the exact hash types returned. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like encode_decode_base64 or generate_password.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for hashing any text but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings. No context for when this tool is preferable over others.

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