Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
fashionzzZ

markdown-to-html

by fashionzzZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

マークダウンからHTMLへの変換MCPサーバー

Markdown を HTML に変換するモデル コンテキスト プロトコル サーバー。

特徴

ツール

  • markdown_to_html - Markdown を HTML に変換する

    • 必須パラメータとしてmdContentを受け取ります

Related MCP server: Markmap MCP Server

発達

依存関係をインストールします:

npm install

サーバーを構築します。

npm run build

自動リビルドを使用した開発の場合:

npm run watch

インストール

Claude Desktop で使用するには、サーバー設定を追加します。

MacOS の場合: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json Windows の場合: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "markdown-to-html": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "/path/to/markdown-to-html/build/index.js"
      ]
    }
  }
}

デバッグ

MCPサーバーはstdio経由で通信するため、デバッグが困難になる場合があります。パッケージスクリプトとして提供されているMCP Inspectorの使用をお勧めします。

npm run inspector

インスペクターは、ブラウザでデバッグ ツールにアクセスするための URL を提供します。

Available Tools

1 tool
markdown_to_htmlC

Convert Markdown to HTML

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mdContentYesMarkdown content to convert

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the conversion action without mentioning any behavioral traits such as error handling, performance characteristics, or output format details. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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 'Convert Markdown to HTML' is extremely concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single, clear sentence that directly communicates the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. Every part of the description earns its place.

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 tool that performs data transformation. It fails to explain what the output looks like (e.g., HTML string), potential limitations, or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'mdContent' clearly documented as 'Markdown content to convert'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Convert Markdown to HTML' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Convert') and resource ('Markdown to HTML'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, with no sibling tools mentioned, there's no opportunity to distinguish from alternatives, which prevents a perfect score of 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any contextual prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does without indicating scenarios for its application, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedmarkdown_to_html
Deploy Server
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as converting Markdown to HTML, making it impossible for an agent to misselect among multiple options.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'markdown_to_html' uses a consistent snake_case pattern and follows a clear verb_noun structure (convert_markdown_to_html implied). Since there is only one tool, there is no inconsistency to evaluate, and the naming is straightforward and appropriate.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool for a server named 'markdown-to-html' feels thin and under-scoped. While the tool directly addresses the core function, typical MCP servers in this domain might include additional tools for validation, configuration, or handling different Markdown flavors, making this count borderline minimal for practical use.

Completeness3/5

The tool covers the basic conversion from Markdown to HTML, which aligns with the server's stated purpose. However, there are notable gaps, such as lack of tools for HTML to Markdown conversion, validation, or customization options, which could limit agent functionality in more complex scenarios.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers