Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Hangeul-mcp

Hangeul-mcp

by pblsketch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_header

Set page header text in a HWPX file. Specify the text and page type (BOTH, EVEN, or ODD) to create a new file with the updated header.

Instructions

Set the page header text (page_type: BOTH/EVEN/ODD as accepted by python-hwpx) to a NEW file.

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "text": "<text>",
      "out_path": "<out_path>"
    },
    "name": "set_header"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
textYes
out_pathYes
page_typeNoBOTH

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It indicates a write operation ('set') and mentions creating a new file, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting, behavior with existing headers) or required permissions.

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 a single sentence, making it concise but lacking structure. It front-loads the action, but brevity comes at the cost of missing important details that could be organized in a clearer way.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions), the description is too incomplete. It does not cover all parameters or explain the output (though output schema exists, we don't see it). The tool's behavior around file creation and header setting needs more context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only adds meaning for the page_type parameter (mentioning accepted values) but provides no explanation for path, text, or out_path. This is insufficient for a 4-parameter tool.

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 clearly states the action ('Set') and the resource ('page header text'), and specifies the page_type values and that it operates on a new file. It differentiates from sibling tools like set_footer, but could be more explicit about the file-creation behavior.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_footer or when not to use it. The description does not mention prerequisites or context for appropriate use.

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