wiktionary-de-mcp

Look up a word

lookup_word

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if a word exists in German Wiktionary and get its dictionary entry or similar suggestions. Returns part of speech, forms, IPA, meanings, etymology, synonyms, and examples in German.

Instructions

Check whether a word exists in the German Wiktionary and return its dictionary entry.

Returns part of speech, grammatical forms (gender, plural, cases, comparison,
verb principal parts, auxiliary verb), hyphenation, IPA, meanings, etymology,
synonyms, antonyms and example sentences, all in German. The German Wiktionary
also has entries for words of other languages (explained in German); select
them with `language`. If the word does not exist the result starts with
"NOT FOUND" and lists similar entries.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`full`	No	Return every line of every section instead of a compact summary.
`word`	Yes	The word to look up, e.g. 'Haus', 'laufen', 'schön'.
`language`	No	Which language's entry to return. Accepts German names as used on Wiktionary ('Deutsch', 'Englisch'), English names ('German', 'English') or ISO codes ('de', 'en'). Use '*' for all languages.	Deutsch

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Oct 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the entry content is in German, the field set returned, and critically the failure mode ('NOT FOUND' prefix with similar entries listed). Rate limits or caching behavior are not mentioned, keeping it short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by return contents, language behavior, and the not-found case in a logical order with no filler. The enumerated return-field list is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, which costs a point.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, the description need not restate return values, yet it covers the non-obvious parts an agent needs: German-language output, the language-selection nuance, and the NOT FOUND sentinel. Only the `full` parameter's effect on output volume goes unmentioned in prose.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents `word`, `language`, and `full`, making 3 the baseline. The description adds a useful nuance about `language` (foreign words get German-language explanations, selectable by language), but says nothing about `full`, so it does not clearly exceed the baseline.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Check whether a word exists in the German Wiktionary and return its dictionary entry'), which is precise and immediately actionable. It is implicitly distinguishable from siblings like search_wiktionary, but no sibling is named or contrasted, so it falls short of full differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: single-word lookup is the obvious use case, and the description notes that foreign-language entries exist and are selected via `language`. However, it never says when to prefer this over search_wiktionary or get_inflection_table, nor any prerequisites, so the agent must infer the boundaries.

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

Deploy Server