Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-document-intelligence

mcp-document-intelligence

by AndreasDietzel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

export_metadata

Convert analyzed document metadata into JSON or CSV files for reporting, archiving, or downstream processing.

Instructions

Export document metadata to JSON or CSV format.

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": {
      "documents": "<documents>"
    },
    "name": "export_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNoExport format (default: json)
documentsYesArray of analyzed document objects

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv4.6.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not disclose whether the export writes a file to disk, returns a string, or requires write permissions. It also omits whether existing files are overwritten and what the response looks like.

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 clause with no wasted wording and the main action front-loaded. It is efficient rather than padded, though it is underspecified rather than concise in the fullest sense.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify whether output is returned inline or written to a file, plus any prerequisite on the documents array. Neither is addressed, leaving an agent unable to predict the result of the call.

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 coverage is 100%, with the format enum and default already documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the two format choices and adds no semantics about the shape of the "documents" array or what metadata fields are exported.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("Export document metadata") and names the two output formats, so an agent knows what the tool produces. It does not distinguish itself from siblings, though no sibling appears to export, which limits the ambiguity.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no stated prerequisite that the documents must already have been processed by analyze_document or analyze_folder. An agent must infer from the "documents" parameter alone that prior analysis is required.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools