GenFlick

read document

native.read_document

DestructiveIdempotent

Read the saved current document and folder, including the content revision required for changes. Page a long document by offset and limit, or choose its exact source_path.

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": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.read_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, which is surprising for a tool framed entirely as a read, and the description does nothing to explain why reading is non-read-only or destructive (e.g. revision consumption, locking, or side effects on the session). With annotations present the bar is lower, but the description should reconcile this mismatch rather than leave the agent assuming a safe read. It also says nothing about the required work_id/request_key/read_skills envelope or what happens on a stale revision.

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?

Two tight sentences with the resource and the revision requirement front-loaded, then the paging/selection strategy. No filler, though the second sentence mixes usage guidance with parameter mechanics in a way that slightly blurs the structure.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a six-parameter tool with five required fields, nested objects, and a session envelope (work_id, expected_catalog_version, request_key, read_skills), none of which the description explains; it also inherits a destructive/not-read-only annotation profile that goes unaddressed. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the invocation contract is left largely to the schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 50%, and the description adds genuine meaning for three nested arguments: limit/offset drive paging of long documents and source_path selects an exact field path. It says nothing about document_id, work_id, request_key, read_skills, or expected_catalog_version, though the schema documents read_skills and expected_catalog_version inline, so the description only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Read the saved current document and folder") and adds scope detail ("including the content revision required for changes"), so an agent knows this returns document content plus a revision token. It does not distinguish itself from near-neighbours such as native.read_document_changes, read_studio_document, native.read_element, or native.read_resource, which an agent must disambiguate on its own.

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?

The second sentence describes how to use the tool (page with offset/limit, or target an exact source_path), which implies a usage pattern for large or nested documents. However, it never states when this tool should be chosen over the many sibling read tools, nor any prerequisite such as needing a document_id from list_studio_documents.

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

All GenFlick tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?