Skip to main content
Glama
Memorable MCP Server
by leouofa

memorable_render_markdown

Converts raw Markdown text into sanitized, GitHub-flavored HTML so AI-generated or user content can be displayed safely.

Instructions

Render Markdown text to sanitized HTML using Memorable's Redcarpet GitHub-flavored markdown pipeline

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": "memorable_render_markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesRaw Markdown text to render into sanitized HTML

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose two meaningful traits: output is sanitized (safe to embed) and the dialect is Redcarpet GFM. It does not say what sanitization strips, whether raw HTML in input is escaped or dropped, or what happens on malformed input.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and transformation, with the pipeline qualifier trailing as supporting detail. Every clause earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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?

For a one-parameter, non-destructive pure transformation with no output schema, the description covers input, processing semantics, and the nature of the return value (sanitized HTML). Only sanitization specifics and error behavior are left unstated, which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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% for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only marginal meaning beyond the schema — namely that the expected markdown dialect is GitHub-flavored via Redcarpet, which tells an agent what syntax extensions will be honored.

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?

States a specific verb and transformation pair: render Markdown text into sanitized HTML, qualified by 'Redcarpet GitHub-flavored markdown pipeline'. The purpose is unmistakable and no sibling (all memory/attachment tools) does anything comparable, though the description does not explicitly say so.

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 only implied: an agent infers it should call this when it has raw Markdown and needs HTML. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no note on when not to use it, and no alternatives are named, but the single-purpose nature of the tool keeps the inference safe.

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