Skip to main content
Glama
rocnubie

WordCast MCP Server

by rocnubie
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are clearly distinct: one provides voice and TTS configuration, while the other returns official links. There is no overlap in purpose or output, so an agent can easily choose the correct tool.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_voices, get_official_links) and use clear, descriptive verbs. The naming is uniform and predictable, making it easy to infer functionality from the name alone.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only two tools, the server feels minimal. For a server that presumably handles WordCast TTS configuration, two informational tools are borderline and leave the impression that more functionality could be exposed.

    Completeness2/5

    The tools only provide static configuration and link information. There is no tool for actual TTS operations such as synthesizing speech or managing voices, which is a significant gap for a server named WordCast. The surface is incomplete for any practical TTS workflow.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • No commit activity data available
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Return' implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any side effects, permissions, or limitations (e.g., whether the config is static or could change). For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not rich in detail.

    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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Return', and includes a parenthetical '(WordCast)' for context. It is concise and to the point with no unnecessary words.

    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?

    Given the tool's simplicity (0 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states what is returned, though it does not elaborate on the meaning of 'canonical' or potential variations in the output.

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

    Parameters4/5

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

    The input schema has zero parameters, and the description correctly adds no parameter information. Per the rubric, zero parameters receives a baseline of 4.

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

    Purpose5/5

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

    The description clearly states the action ('Return') and the resource ('canonical voice and TTS configuration exposed on the site'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_official_links, which presumably deals with links.

    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?

    The description implies usage when voice/TTS config is needed, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, and the sibling tool get_official_links is not cross-referenced.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It goes beyond a simple statement by noting 'when available,' which clarifies behavior when certain links (e.g., docs) are missing. This is a meaningful behavioral disclosure for a zero-parameter, read-only tool.

    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, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It states the action, the object, and the relevant qualifier ('when available') in an efficient, readable manner.

    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?

    Despite having no output schema, the description specifies what will be returned (a list of links) and the categories included (website, support, docs). It is sufficiently complete for a simple retrieval tool with no parameters, though it could optionally mention the exact data structure (e.g., list of strings).

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

    Parameters4/5

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

    The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameter meaning. The input schema is empty, and the description adds no param-specific detail, which is appropriate. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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

    Purpose5/5

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

    The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Return the canonical list of official links for WordCast (website, support, docs when available).' It uses a specific verb ('Return'), identifies the resource ('canonical list of official links'), and scopes it to 'WordCast', which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'list_voices'.

    Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

    Usage Guidelines4/5

    Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

    The description implies the use case: it is the go-to tool for obtaining official WordCast links. While it does not explicitly name the sibling tool or state when not to use it, the context is clear and unambiguous; the sibling 'list_voices' is thematically unrelated, so no conflict arises.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

wordcast-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

wordcast-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/rocnubie/wordcast-mcp'

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