MisarBlog MCP Server

Suggest titles

suggest_titles

Read-only

Generate five SEO-friendly article title options from existing content to improve click-through and search visibility.

Instructions

Generate 5 compelling, SEO-friendly article title options from your existing article content. Use generate_title_seo instead if you want to target specific keywords or have not written content yet.

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": {
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "suggest_titles"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	Your article content in plain text or markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv5.2.0Nov 7, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed1 schema field changedv5.1.3Oct 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / context / description

Previous value: -"The article text to draw titles from, plain or Markdown, 20-8000 characters. More of the real draft yields better-fitting titles than a summary."New value: +"Your article content in plain text or markdown"

Changed1 schema field changedv5.1.0Aug 19, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / context / description

Previous value: -"Your article content in plain text or markdown"New value: +"The article text to draw titles from, plain or Markdown, 20-8000 characters. More of the real draft yields better-fitting titles than a summary."

First observedv2.0.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: the output cardinality (exactly 5 options) and the precondition that source content must already exist. It stops short of noting that repeated calls will yield different results, which the idempotentHint=false annotation hints at but never explains.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and the disambiguation last, with no filler. Nothing could be cut without losing either the output cardinality or the sibling routing.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter, read-only generator with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, precondition, output shape and the alternative route. It omits only minor operational detail such as whether long inputs are truncated or how failures on short content are surfaced.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and there is only one parameter, so the schema already defines 'context' with type, length bounds and format guidance. The description adds a small amount by framing that input as 'your existing article content', but the plain-text/markdown and length constraints remain the schema's job.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Generate ... article title options'), quantifies the output (5 options), and names the sibling it is not ('Use generate_title_seo instead'). An agent can distinguish this from generate_title_seo without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the alternative tool and the two conditions that select it: wanting to target specific keywords, or not having written content yet. That also implies the positive case for this tool — you already have draft content.

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