Academic Writer MCP

Consulter un profil disciplinaire

get_domain_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns a domain’s complete profile with resolved inheritance, including terminology, methodology, rules, and standards, to guide consistent academic writing in that domain.

Instructions

Renvoie un profil complet (héritage résolu) : terminologie, méthodologie, règles, normes.

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": {
      "domain_id": "<domain_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_domain_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain_id`	Yes	Identifiant du profil.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`names`	Yes
`parent`	No
`source`	No	Origine : builtin ou user (rempli au chargement).	builtin
`version`	No
`keywords`	No
`standards`	No
`risk_level`	No		normal
`description`	No
`methodology`	No
`risk_notice`	No
`terminology`	No
`bibliography`	No
`calculations`	No
`validation_rules`	No
`document_sections`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without description help. The description adds one genuine behavioral trait beyond them: inheritance is resolved (overrides merged) rather than returned raw. It does not mention prerequisites such as whether the profile must be loaded/reloaded first, or whether unresolved references can still appear.

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?

A single sentence with the verb and the scope front-loaded, then the returned facets listed compactly. No filler, no repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and annotations cover the safety profile; the description is therefore close to sufficient for a one-parameter getter. The remaining gap is operational context — whether a profile must be loaded or reloaded before this succeeds — which matters given the presence of reload_domain_profiles and identify_domain as siblings.

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% and there is only one parameter (domain_id, documented as 'Identifiant du profil.'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about the identifier's format or where an agent obtains a valid domain_id, so no credit above baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb plus resource ('Renvoie un profil complet') in French, and further enumerates the contents returned: terminologie, méthodologie, règles, normes. This lets an agent distinguish it from list_domain_profiles (a list) reasonably well, but it never explicitly contrasts with the sibling read tools (identify_domain, list_domain_profiles), so full differentiation is left to inference.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: nothing says whether to call this before or after identify_domain, whether a call to reload_domain_profiles is a prerequisite, or when list_domain_profiles should be preferred. The parenthetical 'héritage résolu' implies a resolved-vs-raw distinction but the description never states it as a selection rule.

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

Deploy Server