Retrieve Web Intelligence document configuration properties by document ID, including refresh on open, personal data usage, and formatting locale.
Retrieves document configuration properties (refreshOnOpen, usePersonalData, formatting locale).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| webi_doc_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Retrieves' signals a read-only operation and the property list hints at the payload scope, but there is no disclosure of access/permission requirements, error behavior, or what happens with an invalid or inaccessible webi_doc_id.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with the property examples in a parenthetical. No filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description gives a reasonable sense of what comes back. However, for a tool whose only input is undocumented, the definition is thin relative to the schema/annotation richness available.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the single parameter (webi_doc_id) is undocumented in both schema and description. The description does not state what identifier format is expected or where the agent obtains it, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('document configuration properties') and enumerates the three concrete properties returned (refreshOnOpen, usePersonalData, formatting locale). It is clearly distinguishable from get_doc_details, though it never names that sibling explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this instead of the many neighboring read tools such as get_doc_details, get_doc_parameters, or get_webi_docs. The agent is left to infer the selection criteria from the property list alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.