Skip to main content
Glama
PantelisGeorgiadis

DICOMweb MCP Server

get-encapsulated-pdf-report-text

Convert an Encapsulated PDF DICOM report into readable text by providing study, series, and SOP instance UIDs.

Instructions

Retrieves and converts an Encapsulated PDF instance to human-readable text. Requires Study, Series, and SOP Instance UIDs from find-encapsulated-pdf-reports. Does not retrieve image data.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sopInstanceUidYesDICOM SOP Instance UID (e.g., 1.2.840.113619.2.55.3.604688123.123.1591781234.469). Obtain from find-instances or find-encapsulated-pdf-reports.
studyInstanceUidYesDICOM Study Instance UID (e.g., 1.2.840.113619.2.55.3). Obtain from find-studies or find-encapsulated-pdf-reports.
seriesInstanceUidYesDICOM Series Instance UID (e.g., 1.2.840.113619.2.55.3.604688123). Obtain from find-series or find-encapsulated-pdf-reports.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as potential errors, size limits, or failure modes. The description only says 'converts', which is insufficient transparency for a tool with no annotations.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose and prerequisites but omits details on output format, error handling, and performance. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 100% with detailed descriptions. The description adds context by specifying the UIDs must come from find-encapsulated-pdf-reports, which is more specific than the schema's mention of multiple sources.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves and converts an Encapsulated PDF to human-readable text, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get-structured-report-text and render-instance-frame by specifying it's for PDF text only.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly requires UIDs from a predecessor tool (find-encapsulated-pdf-reports) and clarifies it does not retrieve image data. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' but implies alternatives exist.

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