Skip to main content
Glama
Synctest-hub

BoldSign MCP Server

get_document_properties

Retrieve detailed properties of a BoldSign document including status, metadata, signer information, form fields, and document history using its unique ID.

Instructions

Retrieve comprehensive details of a document in your BoldSign organization. This API allows authorized users, including senders, signers, team admins, and account admins, to access document properties by specifying the unique document ID. The response includes information such as status, metadata, sender and signer details, form fields, and document history. If an unauthorized user attempts to access the document, an unauthorized response will be returned.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
documentIdYesRequired. The unique identifier (ID) of the document to retrieve. This can be obtained from the list documents tool.

Implementation Reference

  • Executes the tool logic: initializes BoldSign DocumentApi, fetches document properties by documentId, handles response or error in MCP format.
    async function getDocumentPropertiesHandler(payload: GetDocumentPropertiesSchemaType): Promise<McpResponse> {
      try {
        const documentApi = new DocumentApi();
        documentApi.basePath = configuration.getBasePath();
        documentApi.setApiKey(configuration.getApiKey());
        const documentProperties: DocumentProperties = await documentApi.getProperties(payload.documentId);
        return handleMcpResponse({
          data: documentProperties,
        });
      } catch (error: any) {
        return handleMcpError(error);
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema requiring 'documentId'.
    const GetDocumentPropertiesSchema = z.object({
      documentId: commonSchema.InputIdSchema.describe(
        'Required. The unique identifier (ID) of the document to retrieve. This can be obtained from the list documents tool.',
      ),
    });
  • Tool definition including method name, description, input schema, and handler reference.
    export const getDocumentPropertiesToolDefinition: BoldSignTool = {
      method: ToolNames.GetDocumentProperties.toString(),
      name: 'Get document properties',
      description:
        'Retrieve comprehensive details of a document in your BoldSign organization. This API allows authorized users, including senders, signers, team admins, and account admins, to access document properties by specifying the unique document ID. The response includes information such as status, metadata, sender and signer details, form fields, and document history. If an unauthorized user attempts to access the document, an unauthorized response will be returned.',
      inputSchema: GetDocumentPropertiesSchema,
      async handler(args: unknown): Promise<McpResponse> {
        return await getDocumentPropertiesHandler(args as GetDocumentPropertiesSchemaType);
      },
    };
  • Registers getDocumentPropertiesToolDefinition as part of the documents API tools array.
    export const documentsApiToolsDefinitions: BoldSignTool[] = [
      getDocumentPropertiesToolDefinition,
      listDocumentsToolDefinition,
      listTeamDocumentsToolDefinition,
      sendReminderForDocumentToolDefinition,
      revokeDocumentToolDefinition,
    ];
  • Enum defining the tool name constant.
    GetDocumentProperties = 'get_document_properties',
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses authorization requirements and error handling for unauthorized access, which is valuable behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, pagination, or response format details. The description adds meaningful context but falls short of fully covering behavioral traits for a read operation.

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?

The description is appropriately sized at three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value: purpose, authorization context, and response/error details. There's minimal redundancy, though the second sentence could be slightly more concise by integrating authorization details into the first.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate context for a simple read tool with one parameter. It covers purpose, authorization, and basic error handling. However, it lacks details on response structure (e.g., what 'comprehensive details' include beyond listed examples) and doesn't address potential complexities like rate limits or pagination, leaving gaps in completeness.

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%, with the single parameter 'documentId' well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no examples or format details). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate with extra insights.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Retrieve comprehensive details of a document' with the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'document properties'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_documents' (which lists multiple documents) and 'revoke_document' (which modifies document status). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'get_template_properties' or 'list_team_documents', which might have overlapping retrieval aspects.

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 description implies usage context by specifying 'authorized users, including senders, signers, team admins, and account admins' and mentions unauthorized access handling. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_documents' for summaries or 'get_template_properties' for template details. No clear 'when-not' or prerequisite information is provided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Synctest-hub/boldsign-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server