estonian-mcp

syllabify

Read-onlyIdempotent

Split one Estonian word into lowercased syllables with quantity (välde 1–3) and stress marking to help parse pronunciation; note Vabamorf's guesser may err on common words.

Instructions

Lowercased syllables of one Estonian word; quantity is the välde (1-3), accent 1 marks stress. Vabamorf's guesser syllabifier: it can err even on common words.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`word`	Yes	One Estonian word, no whitespace.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.9.0Oct 24, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / word / description
```
Previous value: -"A single Estonian word (no whitespace) to split into syllables."New value: +"One Estonian word, no whitespace."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / word / title
```
Removed value: -"Word"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"syllabifyArguments"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / title
```
Removed value: -"Result"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"syllabifyOutput"
```
First observedv0.2.4Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/closed-world, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the underlying engine is Vabamorf's guesser syllabifier and it can err even on common words, so the agent knows to treat results as approximate. It also decodes output semantics (välde 1-3, accent=stress) that annotations cannot convey.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then output-field semantics, then the reliability caveat. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

With an output schema present and a fully documented single parameter, the description only needs to add output semantics and caveats, which it does. The remaining gap is routing guidance against sibling tools, but that is minor for such a narrow utility.

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?

There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it fully ('One Estonian word, no whitespace'). The description's 'one Estonian word' reinforces but does not extend that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific resource and transformation: lowercased syllables of exactly one Estonian word, plus what the returned `quantity` and `accent` fields mean. It is clearly distinct in substance from siblings like tokenize or analyze_morphology, though it never names or contrasts them explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: if you need syllables, call this. The scope constraint 'one Estonian word' hints at the boundary (not phrases, not multiple words), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to alternatives such as tokenize.

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