GetSign MCP

getsign_generate_documents

Generate documents for a Getsign workflow and Monday item.

    Generates a document from the workflow's template and attaches it to
    the configured File column. First verifies the workflow's
    generateDocument config is complete (enabled +
    statusColumnId, statusColumnLabel, outputColumnId, outputFileType). If
    not, returns error_type=GENERATE_DOCUMENT_NOT_CONFIGURED with the missing
    fields, the board's status_columns / file_columns, and
    next_tool=getsign_update_workflow_settings instead of firing. Present
    those columns and ask the user which to use — do not auto-pick.

    Starts POST /generate-flow/generate-documents and by default waits on the
    SSE progress stream until completed/failed. Set wait=false to only enqueue
    and get a jobId. Pass skip_preflight=true only when config was just validated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wait`	No
`item_id`	Yes
`item_name`	Yes
`envelope_id`	Yes
`confirm_token`	No	Retry token from a prior CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED response. Do not invent one.
`skip_preflight`	No
`timeout_seconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses the preflight verification, the exact error_type returned on failure, the SSE progress-wait behavior by default, and the wait=false escape hatch. These are meaningful behavioral traits that go far beyond the annotations, which only indicate readOnly=false.

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?

The description is moderately long but every sentence earns its place: purpose, preflight behavior, failure routing, user-instruction, and the wait/skip flags. It is front-loaded with the core function before diving into edge cases.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description covers the essential call path, failure mode, retry/enqueue behavior, and when to bypass safeguards. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and handle the main branching scenarios.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 14%, so the description carries much of the burden. It adds real semantics for wait (enqueue-only vs waiting on SSE) and skip_preflight (only after config validation). The main parameters envelope_id, item_id, and item_name are not individually explained, but their role is largely inferable from the opening sentence about workflows and Monday items.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Generate documents for a Getsign workflow and Monday item', and immediately clarifies the concrete effect: generating from a workflow template and attaching to the configured File column. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like getsign_generate_signing_link or getsign_send_signature_request.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit operational guidance: when config is incomplete, route to getsign_update_workflow_settings instead of firing; set wait=false to only enqueue; pass skip_preflight=true only when config was just validated; and present column options to the user rather than auto-picking. This is unusually direct and actionable.

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

All GetSign MCP 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?