Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Hangeul-mcp

Hangeul-mcp

by pblsketch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

create_hwpx_from_markdown

Convert Markdown content into an HWPX document, preserving the original formatting structures from HWP/HWPX files.

Instructions

Create an HWPX from Markdown content (delegate).

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": {
      "markdown": "<markdown>",
      "out_path": "<out_path>"
    },
    "name": "create_hwpx_from_markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
markdownYes
out_pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'create HWPX from Markdown' and hints at delegation via '(delegate)', but does not explain delegation, side effects (e.g., file overwriting), permissions, or return behavior.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very short (one phrase), which is concise but sacrifices completeness. It front-loads the key action but omits important details, making it insufficient for a 2-parameter tool with no parameter descriptions.

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 tool has 2 required parameters and no output schema details in the description, it lacks completeness. No mention of return values, error conditions, or relationship to 58 sibling tools. The description does not adequately guide selection or usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. It mentions 'Markdown content' but does not clarify whether 'markdown' expects raw text or a file path (despite schema type 'string'), and 'out_path' is left unexplained. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to compensate.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states 'Create an HWPX from Markdown content', which specifies the action and output format. However, the parenthetical '(delegate)' introduces ambiguity, lacking sibling differentiation and leaving unclear whether the tool directly performs creation or delegates.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to prefer this tool over siblings like 'create_document_from_spec' or 'hwpx_to_html', nor any criteria for when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools