Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
API Hub MCP — 337+ Tools

API Hub MCP — 337+ Tools

by scotia1973-bot
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

json_to_xml

Convert a JSON string to XML format for legacy systems, SOAP APIs, or configuration files. Specify an optional root element name.

Instructions

Convert a JSON string to XML format.

Use this when you need XML output from JSON data for legacy systems,
SOAP APIs, or configuration files.

Parameters:
    json_str — The JSON string to convert.
    root     — Name of the root XML element (default: "root").

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": {
      "json_str": "<json_str>"
    },
    "name": "json_to_xml"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
json_strYes
rootNoroot

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.4.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses basic conversion behavior and root parameter default, but does not mention error handling for invalid JSON, encoding, or output structure details.

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?

Description is two sentences plus parameter list, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 no annotations but presence of output schema, description covers purpose, parameters, and use cases. Missing error handling or output format hints, but overall complete for a simple conversion tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning to both parameters: json_str as 'the JSON string to convert' and root as 'name of the root XML element (default: 'root').' No constraints like valid JSON mentioned, but adds clear semantics.

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?

Description clearly states 'Convert a JSON string to XML format' and specifies use cases for legacy systems, SOAP APIs, and configuration files. Implicitly distinguishes from sibling xml_to_json by focusing on JSON-to-XML direction.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when you need XML output from JSON data for legacy systems, SOAP APIs, or configuration files.' Does not mention when not to use or explicitly name alternatives, but context is sufficient for typical 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