Transpile Terse source code into readable, executable Python. Use it to convert AI-native Terse scripts into standard Python for execution or debugging.
Transpile Terse source to readable, executable Python.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | Terse source code to transpile. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether transpilation requires aliases to be defined first (the alias_* siblings imply shared state), whether the operation is pure/read-only, what happens on invalid source, or what the returned value looks like.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero padding; nothing is wasted. It is arguably terse to the point of under-specification, but as structure and economy go it is well formed.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-input, one-output conversion tool this is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema the description should state what is returned (the Python source text? a status?) and whether alias context affects the result. Those gaps leave the agent guessing about the return contract.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'source' fully. The description adds no syntax, format, or size guidance beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline 3 when structured data does the heavy lifting.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Transpile') and resource ('Terse source') plus the output target ('readable, executable Python'), which implicitly separates it from terse_eval (which would execute) and terse_parse (which would only parse). It stops short of naming siblings or stating the relationship explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool is mentioned. With terse_eval and terse_parse in the sibling set, an agent is left to infer on its own that this converts source rather than executing or inspecting it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
This server cannot be deployed