PR-CY MCP

read_artifact

Прочитать содержимое активной или указанной ревизии артефакта.

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": {
      "artifact_id": "<artifact_id>"
    },
    "name": "read_artifact"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`artifact_id`	Yes	Идентификатор артефакта.
`revision_id`	No	Идентификатор ревизии. None — активная ревизия.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`artifact`	Yes	Артефакт
`revision`	Yes	Ревизия артефакта

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Прочитать' implies a safe read, but nothing is said about access permissions, behavior when the artifact or revision does not exist, or whether revision resolution falls back to active when the ID is invalid — all relevant for an artifact-revision reader.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the key distinction (active vs. specified revision) is front-loaded. It is efficient but borders on under-specification rather than crisp completeness.

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 and the input schema is fully documented, so return values and parameter meanings need not be re-explained. Still, for a read tool with no annotations, the description omits any note on permissions, missing-artifact behavior, or how it relates to the artifact-mutation 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% and both parameters are documented there, including the 'None — активная ревизия' default. The description only restates that the revision may be active or specified, adding no new semantics such as ID format, validity constraints, or error behavior. Baseline 3 applies.

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 concrete verb ('Прочитать') and a precise resource ('содержимое активной или указанной ревизии артефакта'), including the scope of the revision selection. It is clearly distinct from siblings like list_artifact_revisions or diff_artifact by virtue of naming 'содержимое', though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 phrase 'активной или указанной ревизии' hints at the default behavior but gives no guidance on when to pick this tool over list_artifacts, search_artifact, diff_artifact, or get_article. No preconditions, no exclusions, no alternatives are mentioned.

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

All PR-CY 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?