mcp-compress

decompress

Restore original data from base64-encoded compressed input by specifying the algorithm used (gzip, brotli, or deflate). Solves the need to recover compressed content.

Instructions

Decompress previously compressed data. Requires the base64 compressed data and the algorithm used.

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": {
      "compressed_base64": "<compressed_base64>",
      "algorithm": "<algorithm>"
    },
    "name": "decompress"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`compressed_base64`	Yes	Base64-encoded compressed data
`algorithm`	Yes	Algorithm used for compression

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the operation (decompress) and input format, but does not describe the output, error handling, or behavior on incorrect algorithm.

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 of 12 words, no fluff, essential information front-loaded. Efficient and clear.

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?

Tool is simple, but description omits output format. With no output schema, stating what the tool returns would improve completeness. Otherwise adequate for basic use.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mirrors parameter names and types without adding new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 tool's action ('decompress') and resource ('previously compressed data'), with specific input requirements. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'compress' and 'analyze'.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly requires 'base64 compressed data and the algorithm used', indicating prerequisites. While no direct alternatives are mentioned, the sibling context and clear purpose make usage obvious.

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

Deploy Server