EaseWeb

Content of a version

get_version

Read-only

What a presentation looked like in a version: "markdown" (default) -- its slides and texts as markdown; "json" -- the complete content.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	The presentation's slug (its address: /movie/<slug>/).
`format`	No	Result format: "markdown" (default) or "json" (the complete content).
`number`	Yes	The version number.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`agent`	No
`author`	No
`number`	Yes
`changes`	No	What changed in this version.
`content`	No
`markdown`	No
`created_at`	No	ISO 8601 date and time.
`updated_at`	No	ISO 8601 date and time.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / format / description

Added value: +"Result format: \"markdown\" (default) or \"json\" (the complete content)."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "The version, with \"markdown\" (default) or \"content\" (format \"json\").",
+  "properties": {
+    "agent": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "author": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "changes": {
+      "description": "What changed in this version.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "content": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "created_at": {
+      "description": "ISO 8601 date and time.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "markdown": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "number": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "description": "ISO 8601 date and time.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "number"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the format-selection behavior, but no context about availability of versions, access requirements, or error conditions, so it adds only modest value beyond the structured fields.

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?

A single compact sentence front-loads the purpose and then enumerates the two format modes. It is efficient, though the format detail largely duplicates the schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, the description omits anything about when a version is retrievable or how it relates to sibling read tools, leaving a small but real gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so slug, number, and format are all documented in the schema. The description restates the format enum meaning but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieving what a presentation looked like at a given version, including its slides and texts. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not differentiate itself from siblings like get_presentation, read_presentation, or list_history, so an agent must infer the boundary from names alone.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description never states when to use get_version versus get_presentation, get_slide, or get_format, nor any prerequisites such as the version having to exist. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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

All EaseWeb 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?