Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
json-tools

json-tools

by TheoryofShadows
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

minify_json

Reduce JSON or JSONC to a single line using local files or inline strings, with an optional output file. Operates offline with no external requests.

Instructions

Minify JSON to one line. Local files/strings only. Does not fetch URLs or contact external services.

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": "minify_json"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoRaw JSON/JSONC string (alternative to filePath).
filePathNoLocal JSON/JSONC file path.
outputPathNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool works only on local content and has no network side effects. However, it does not explain whether input is read and output is written to outputPath, what the function returns if no outputPath is given, or how it handles JSONC input, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 two short sentences with the action verb and main constraint front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and there is no filler or unnecessary detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented outputPath parameter, the description omits essential invocation context: what outputPath does, what happens when it is omitted, and whether JSONC is fully supported. The local-only and no-network statements are helpful, but an agent still must guess about output handling.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema already describes text and filePath clearly, and the description's 'Local files/strings only' adds little beyond that. More importantly, outputPath has no schema description and the tool description does not explain it at all, so one of three parameters remains semantically opaque.

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 states a specific verb ('Minify') and resource ('JSON to one line'), making the tool's core function immediately clear. The additional scope qualifier 'Local files/strings only' differentiates it from any tool that might fetch remote content, and clearly separates it from siblings like validate_json or pretty_json.

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 gives a clear usage boundary: local files/strings only and explicitly no URL fetching or external service contact. It does not name sibling alternatives or state when to choose this over pretty_json or validate_json, so it lacks explicit alternative routing, but the context is solid.

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