Skip to main content
Glama
Wordbe

mac2win-zip MCP Server

by Wordbe
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Local

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are clearly distinct: one creates a Windows-compatible ZIP, the other validates an existing ZIP. There is no overlap in their purposes, so an agent can unambiguously choose the right tool.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: create_windows_compatible_zip and validate_zip_for_windows. While the second name uses a preposition, the overall structure is uniform and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With only two tools, the server is tightly scoped to its stated purpose of creating and validating Windows-compatible ZIP files. Each tool is essential and there is no unnecessary bloat.

    Completeness5/5

    For the domain of Windows-compatible ZIP handling, the server covers both primary operations: creation and validation. This is a complete workflow with no missing steps or dead ends.

  • Average 3.5/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects and return values. It only says 'Validate' without explaining the output, error behavior, or whether it modifies anything.

    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 succinct and front-loaded with a clear purpose statement, followed by a structured parameter list. Every sentence adds value.

    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?

    The description lacks essential context: no return value, no validation criteria, and no output schema. It is too sparse for a tool with no annotations or schema hints.

    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 description includes an Args section that explains 'zip_path' and 'working_dir', which supplements the schema where descriptions are absent. However, the explanation is minimal and doesn't clarify how 'working_dir' affects validation.

    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 function with a specific verb ('Validate') and resource ('a ZIP file'), and the scope 'Windows-compatible' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'create_windows_compatible_zip'.

    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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs the sibling tool. The description only states what it does, not when to prefer it.

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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states that a Windows-compatible ZIP is created. It does not reveal important behavioral traits such as whether existing output files are overwritten, how directories are traversed, what compatibility adjustments are made, or what side effects occur on failure. The term 'Windows-compatible' is vague and not elaborated, leaving common implementation details undisclosed.

    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 concise and well-structured: a single purpose line followed by a focused Args list. Every sentence contributes useful information, and the front-loaded purpose statement makes the tool's intent immediately clear without unnecessary fluff.

    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?

    Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a side-effecting file-creation tool. It covers parameter meanings but omits critical context such as return behavior, overwrite handling, recursion details, error conditions, and any relationship or follow-up with sibling 'validate_zip_for_windows'. An agent would need to make many assumptions before safely invoking this tool.

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

    Parameters5/5

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

    The input schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description's Args section fully compensates by explaining each parameter: paths are file or folder paths, output is the output ZIP filename, and working_dir is the base directory for relative paths. This adds meaningful semantic clarity beyond the raw schema types and defaults.

    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 function with a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('Windows-compatible ZIP file from files and/or folders'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'validate_zip_for_windows' by focusing on creation rather than validation, so there is no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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

    Usage Guidelines3/5

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

    The description implies when to use it ('Create Windows-compatible ZIP file') but does not provide explicit usage context or exclusions. It does not mention alternatives like 'validate_zip_for_windows' or explain when the tool should not be used, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate scenario from the tool name and one-line summary.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

mac2win-zip-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

mac2win-zip-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Wordbe/mac2win-zip-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server