Skip to main content
Glama
SVerITG

Metis

by SVerITG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Metis — Read Document Template

read_document_template

Displays a stored Word template paragraph by paragraph with keys, helping you identify text to fill and pass specific paragraph keys to the fill step.

Instructions

Show a stored Word template paragraph by paragraph, so it can be filled in.

The researcher's templates (e.g. an ethics-committee cover letter) are kept in
Metis — see list_templates; never ask them for the file. Returns each
non-empty paragraph with its key (p12, h0 for the header). Then call
fill_document_template with the keys whose text should change.

Args:
    template: Template name or part of it. Empty = the first stored document template.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
templateNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses that only non-empty paragraphs are returned, the key scheme (p12, h0 for header), and that templates live in Metis rather than on the user's disk. It stops short of stating error behavior when a template name matches nothing or multiple templates.

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?

Three short paragraphs, front-loaded with the action, followed by workflow routing and the single argument. No redundant restatement of the title or name.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with an output schema, this covers the essentials: source, output shape, keys, and the follow-up call. The only gap is not-found or ambiguous-name behavior, which an agent would otherwise have to discover by trial.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must define the parameter and it does: 'Template name or part of it. Empty = the first stored document template.' This adds fuzzy-match and default semantics absent from the schema, though it doesn't say how ambiguity between partial matches is resolved.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Show a stored Word template paragraph by paragraph') plus the purpose ('so it can be filled in'). It distinguishes itself from list_templates and fill_document_template by naming both siblings and their roles.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit routing: use list_templates to find templates, never ask the user for the file, and then call fill_document_template with the returned keys. When-to-use and next-step alternatives are both spelled out.

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