estonian-mcp

classify_register

Read-onlyIdempotent

Classify Estonian text by formal vs colloquial register to get a directional score, Estonian tier label, and mixed-style warning for style checks.

Instructions

Heuristic Estonian register score: a directional hint, not a verdict. Most everyday prose scores neutral, and address forms (sina/teie) are not scored.

score runs from -1 (colloquial) to 1 (formal); tier_estonian is the correct Estonian label to quote (formaalne, never *formalne). consistency.is_mixed: formal and colloquial markers both occur, which jars even when the tier is neutral. structure adds up to 0.4 (applied) for umbisikuline tegumood and noun density, from 25 words up and never on net-colloquial text. For a per-issue kantseliit breakdown use check_officialese.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes	Estonian text to classify by register (formal vs colloquial).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tier`	No
`score`	No
`structure`	No
`word_count`	No
`consistency`	No
`tier_estonian`	No
`formal_markers`	No
`colloquial_markers`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed22 schema fields changedv0.9.0Oct 24, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / text / title
```
Removed value: -"Text"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"classify_registerArguments"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / colloquial_markers / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / colloquial_markers / title
```
Removed value: -"Colloquial Markers"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / consistency / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / consistency / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / consistency / title
```
Removed value: -"Consistency"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / formal_markers / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / formal_markers / title
```
Removed value: -"Formal Markers"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / note
```
Removed value: -{
-  "default": null,
-  "title": "Note",
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / score / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / score / title
```
Removed value: -"Score"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / structure / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / structure / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / structure / title
```
Removed value: -"Structure"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / tier / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / tier / title
```
Removed value: -"Tier"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / tier_estonian / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / tier_estonian / title
```
Removed value: -"Tier Estonian"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / word_count / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / word_count / title
```
Removed value: -"Word Count"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"_RegisterResult"
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.6Aug 23, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / structure

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Structure",
+  "type": "object"
+}

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?

Annotations already mark it read-only/idempotent/closed-world, and the description adds substantial beyond-schema behavior: the -1 to 1 score range, the correct label to quote (formaalne, not *formalne), what consistency.is_mixed means, and the exact conditions under which structure contributes (up to 0.4, from 25 words, never on net-colloquial text). This is unusually rich disclosure for a heuristic scorer.

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 core caveat ('directional hint, not a verdict') before the detail, and every sentence carries information about output fields or applicability. The backtick-fragment style is dense and slightly telegraphic, but nothing is padding.

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?

Complete for a single-input scorer. The output schema exists, yet the description goes further by explaining how to read score, tier_estonian, consistency.is_mixed and structure, which is exactly what an agent needs to interpret the result.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds input-relevant meaning: address forms are unscored and the structure component only applies from 25 words up, which tells an agent how input length and content affect the result.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Heuristic Estonian register score') plus the scope limit ('a directional hint, not a verdict'). It explicitly disambiguates from the nearest sibling, check_officialese, so an agent can choose without opening either schema.

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?

Gives real usage context: everyday prose scores neutral, address forms (sina/teie) are excluded, and per-issue kantseliit work should go to check_officialese instead. It lacks an explicit 'call this when...' trigger sentence, but the alternative routing is clear.

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