EaseWeb

Content of a version

get_version

Read-onlyIdempotent

What a presentation you may edit 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, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds some value by characterizing what is returned (slides and texts as markdown, or complete content as json), but says nothing about permissions actually required, size limits, or behavior on a non-existent version number.

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 with the format options enumerated inline; nothing is wasted. The opening clause 'What a presentation you may edit looked like in a version' is slightly convoluted, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

With an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, and the schema covers all three parameters. However, the description omits how an agent obtains a valid version number and how this read relates to restore_version, which is a noticeable gap for a tool living among many version/history siblings.

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 the schema already documents slug, number, and format, and the enum with its default. The description repeats the format semantics ('markdown' default, 'json' complete content) rather than adding syntax or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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 names a specific verb+resource combo — retrieving the content of a version of a presentation — and the format clause clarifies what 'content' means. It is clear on its own but does not distinguish itself from siblings like list_history, restore_version, or read_presentation, so the agent must still infer where it fits.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance. The phrase 'a presentation you may edit' hints at a permission precondition but says nothing about when this tool should be chosen over list_history (finding the version number) or restore_version (reverting). No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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?