Skip to main content
Glama
phuihock
by phuihock

embeddings

Generate vector representations of text for semantic analysis, similarity search, and AI applications using DeepInfra's API.

Instructions

Generate embeddings for a list of texts using DeepInfra OpenAI-compatible API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that executes the embeddings tool logic, generating embeddings for a list of input texts using the DeepInfra OpenAI-compatible API.
    async def embeddings(inputs: list[str]) -> str:
        """Generate embeddings for a list of texts using DeepInfra OpenAI-compatible API."""
        model = DEFAULT_MODELS["embeddings"]
        try:
            response = await client.embeddings.create(
                model=model,
                input=inputs,
            )
            embeddings_list = [item.embedding for item in response.data]
            return str(embeddings_list)
        except Exception as e:
            return f"Error generating embeddings: {type(e).__name__}: {str(e)}"
  • Conditional registration of the embeddings tool using FastMCP's @app.tool() decorator based on ENABLED_TOOLS configuration.
    if "all" in ENABLED_TOOLS or "embeddings" in ENABLED_TOOLS:
        @app.tool()
  • Function signature providing the input schema (inputs: list[str]) and output type (str) for automatic tool schema generation in FastMCP.
    async def embeddings(inputs: list[str]) -> str:
  • Configuration for the default model used by the embeddings tool.
    "embeddings": os.getenv("MODEL_EMBEDDINGS", "sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2"),
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 mentions the API provider but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or output format. For a tool that likely involves external API calls, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to understand quickly. Every part of the sentence contributes essential information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (external API call), no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral details like rate limits or error handling. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description doesn't need to explain those, but it should provide more context for safe usage.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying that inputs are 'a list of texts' and mentions the API, but doesn't detail constraints like text length limits or supported languages. With 1 parameter, the baseline is 4, but the description only partially compensates for the lack of schema details, resulting in a moderate score.

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 ('Generate embeddings') and the resource ('for a list of texts'), specifying the API provider ('DeepInfra OpenAI-compatible API'). It distinguishes from siblings like text_generation or text_classification by focusing on embeddings. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings, such as token_classification, which might also process text.

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. It doesn't mention use cases like semantic search or text similarity, nor does it compare to other text-processing siblings like text_generation or text_classification. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/phuihock/mcp-deeinfra'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server