agent-utils-mcp

tool_slug_generate

Convert input text into a URL-safe slug. Specify a separator (default hyphen) to customize the output format for clean, readable URLs.

Instructions

Generate a URL-safe slug from text.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "tool_slug_generate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes
`separator`	No		-

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It only says 'URL-safe slug' without detailing transformations (e.g., case normalization, allowed characters, handling of non-ASCII). No side effects are mentioned, but the minimal description leaves much unspecified.

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 communicates the purpose without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and to the point.

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?

For a simple string transformation, the description is adequate to understand the core operation. However, the lack of output schema and details about edge cases (e.g., empty strings, special character handling) makes it incomplete for complex usage scenarios, though it covers the basic use case.

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 has no descriptions for parameters, so the description must compensate. It clarifies 'text' as input, but 'separator' is not described beyond its name and default value. The description does not explain how the separator affects output, leaving the parameter semantics insufficient.

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: generating a URL-safe slug from text. The verb 'generate' and resource 'slug' are specific, and it stands out from sibling tools like JSON or CSV converters.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites or context. The description is purely functional and lacks usage conditions or scenarios.

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

Deploy Server