Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-docparser

mcp-docparser

by Jasonzld
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

batch_ocr

Extract text from multiple images in a folder in one run. Provide a folder path to OCR every image and collect the recognized text.

Instructions

Process multiple images in a folder and extract text

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": {
      "folder_path": "<folder_path>"
    },
    "name": "batch_ocr"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
folder_pathYesPath to folder containing images

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

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 behavioral burden. It doesn't disclose output format, whether results are aggregated or per-image, handling of non-image files, failure behavior on unreadable images, or whether processing is synchronous. Significant gaps for a batch processing tool.

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 efficient sentence with no waste and the core behavior front-loaded. Not verbose, though it is arguably too terse given the missing behavioral context.

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 batch tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves several agent-relevant questions unanswered: result shape, per-image success/failure handling, and supported image formats. The description is under-specified relative to the complexity of batch processing.

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 single folder_path parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema's own description. 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 specific verb ('extract text') and resource ('images in a folder'), and the batch scope distinguishes it from the singular ocr_image sibling. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with ocr_image, leaving some differentiation implicit.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives mentioned. The agent must infer that this is the batch counterpart to ocr_image without any explicit routing signal.

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