Base36 id charset, value discarded

Agent readability score

Strengths

• Some tools have clear, specific purposes (e.g., 'validate-json', 'utc-time')
• Consistent parameter structure across tools may aid uniformity

Weaknesses

• Tool names are often cryptic or repetitive (e.g., 'base36-id', 'browser-url-ok' vs 'playwright-url-ok')
• Descriptions frequently repeat names instead of explaining use cases
• All parameters are identical across tools with no indication of relevance or required fields
• High tool overlap creates ambiguity (e.g., multiple URL validation tools)
• No error handling or constraint documentation

• base36-id — Name and description are identical, providing no functional context
• browser-url-ok — Duplicates 'playwright-url-ok' functionality without clear differentiation
• normalize-url — Description mentions dropping query/fragment but doesn't specify input requirements
• geo-hint — Parameter 'city' is required for geolocation but not marked as such
• think-steps — Provides a thinking template but no guidance on when to use it

Verdict

The toolset suffers from poor naming conventions, excessive overlap, and inconsistent documentation. While some tools have clear purposes, the lack of parameter specificity and error handling makes it difficult for an agent to select and use tools effectively, aligning with the 45/100 readability score.

9/13/2026, 12:33:42 AM

Event narrative