Medium Blog MCP Server

by Navneet1710

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Prepare Plagiarism Chunks

prepare_plagiarism_chunks

Split content into manageable chunks for external plagiarism detection.

Instructions

Split content into <10k character chunks for external plagiarism tools

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": {
      "session_id": "<session_id>"
    },
    "name": "prepare_plagiarism_chunks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`session_id`	Yes	Active session ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not mention any side effects, state changes, or retention of data. It is unclear whether this tool modifies session state or returns chunks directly.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the operation without unnecessary detail or repetition.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple utility, but it lacks information on what 'chunks' entail, how they are stored or returned, and any relationship to the plagiarism workflow. These details would improve completeness.

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?

The sole parameter session_id is described in the schema ('Active session ID'), but the tool description adds no further meaning or constraints. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Split content') and the purpose ('into <10k character chunks for external plagiarism tools'), making the tool's function 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?

The description gives a general purpose but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_plagiarism_summary, record_plagiarism_result) or when it should not be used.

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