ZapifyAPI MCP Server

generate_password

Generate random passwords with configurable length, character types, and count to create strong credentials for protecting accounts.

Instructions

Generate secure random passwords.

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": "generate_password"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`length`	No
`numbers`	No
`symbols`	No
`lowercase`	No
`uppercase`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 3, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states 'secure random passwords.' It does not explain what the function returns, whether it is deterministic, or whether it relies on a secure random source. This leaves significant uncertainty about the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely brief, but this is under-specification rather than appropriate conciseness. For a tool with six configurable parameters, a single sentence is insufficient to be useful, and it does not earn its place by conveying necessary detail.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's six parameters, lack of annotations, and missing output schema, the description is far from complete. It provides no information about the output format, parameter semantics, or any behavioral nuances, making the tool effectively impossible to use correctly without additional documentation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has six parameters with zero description coverage, and the description does not mention any of them. Nothing beyond the parameter names (count, length, numbers, etc.) is provided, so the description fails to add any meaning to the parameters.

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 'Generate secure random passwords' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like generate_hash and generate_uuid by explicitly targeting passwords.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context is given about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or scenarios where a different tool might be preferable. The description offers no usage direction.

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