estonian-mcp

check_compound_familiarity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if an Estonian compound noun is attested in corpora, WordNet, legal terms, or a domain glossary; use it on coined compounds to assess familiarity and suspect flags.

Instructions

Attestation check for Estonian compound nouns; use it on compounds you coined.

A compound is attested when its lemma is in the fastText 100K-word corpus vocabulary (in_vocab), Estonian WordNet (in_wordnet) or the legal terms list (neighbour_quality.legal_term). Read attested first: false is normal for correct specialist words, not evidence of invention, and never on its own a reason to rewrite.

is_suspect is narrow: unattested, and the nearest neighbour is a real word scoring under 0.55 (mõtteliin). Judge a flag from neighbours (unattested entries only): coherent related words mean the word is real. neighbour_quality.signal: "none": the nearest neighbour is scrape junk, so there is no verdict. Recall is low on purpose: some coinages pass, and so does any stilted compound (check register with check_officialese).

in_domain_glossary: true (only with a server glossary): the organisation's own word, so treat it as real. For your own glossary use check_domain_terms. Proper nouns are skipped.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes	Estonian text to check.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`all_compounds`	No
`wordnet_checked`	No
`summary_estonian`	No
`suspect_compounds`	No
`compounds_analysed`	No
`unattested_compounds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed20 schema fields changedv0.9.0Oct 24, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / text / description
```
Previous value: -"Estonian text whose compound nouns are checked for calque / translationese risk."New value: +"Estonian text to check."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / text / title
```
Removed value: -"Text"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"check_compound_familiarityArguments"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / all_compounds / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / all_compounds / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / all_compounds / title
```
Removed value: -"All Compounds"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / compounds_analysed / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / compounds_analysed / title
```
Removed value: -"Compounds Analysed"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / note / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / note / title
```
Removed value: -"Note"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / summary_estonian / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / summary_estonian / title
```
Removed value: -"Summary Estonian"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / suspect_compounds / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / suspect_compounds / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / suspect_compounds / items / type
```
Previous value: -"object"New value: +"string"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / suspect_compounds / title
```
Removed value: -"Suspect Compounds"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / text
```
Removed value: -{
-  "default": null,
-  "title": "Text",
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / unattested_compounds
```
Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / wordnet_checked
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"_CompoundFamiliarityResult"
```
First observedv0.2.4Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses the three attestation sources, the deliberate low recall, the narrow definition of `is_suspect` with the 0.55 threshold, the `signal: "none"` junk-neighbour case, and the crucial false-positive caveat that unattested is normal for specialist words. This is exactly the context annotations cannot carry.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the purpose, then the core result interpretation, then edge cases — good ordering with no filler prose. It is dense and somewhat long for one parameter, but nearly every sentence carries decision-relevant information (thresholds, field names, fallbacks).

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

Completeness5/5

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

With an output schema present, the description needn't enumerate return values, yet it explains the key result fields (`attested`, `is_suspect`, `neighbours`, `neighbour_quality.signal`, `in_domain_glossary`) and their interpretation. Nothing an agent needs in order to call and interpret this correctly is missing.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents `text`. The description adds no syntax, format or length guidance for the input, so it neither helps nor hurts — baseline 3.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: an attestation check for Estonian compound nouns, and immediately narrows scope ('use it on compounds you coined'), which separates it from sibling check_compounds and check_domain_terms. An agent can distinguish it from every listed sibling without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use it (coined compounds), how to read the result ('Read `attested` first', 'Judge a flag from `neighbours`'), and names alternatives with their conditions (check_domain_terms for your own glossary, check_officialese for register). Also states exclusions: proper nouns are skipped.

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