Skip to main content
Glama
docs-mcp-server

docs-mcp-server

refresh_version

Re-scrape and update only changed pages of a previously indexed library version; when no version is specified, refresh the current indexed version.

Instructions

Re-scrape a previously indexed library version, updating only changed pages.

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": {
      "library": "<library>"
    },
    "name": "refresh_version"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
libraryYesLibrary name.
versionNoLibrary version (optional, refreshes latest if omitted).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.4.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: the operation is incremental and only changed pages are rewritten, which tells the agent existing data is largely preserved. It says nothing about whether the call is long-running or returns a job handle, which matters given the sibling job tools.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the action, target, and update semantics, and no filler. Nothing is repeated or restated.

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?

For a two-parameter, no-output-schema tool this is nearly sufficient, but the presence of job-oriented siblings (get_job_info, cancel_job, list_jobs) suggests an asynchronous execution model that the description never addresses. One clause on whether an id is returned for polling would complete it.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents both parameters, including that omitting 'version' refreshes the latest. The description only reinforces that a previously indexed version is targeted; it adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Re-scrape a previously indexed library version') plus a scope qualifier ('updating only changed pages'). It is not explicitly contrasted with the closest sibling (scrape_docs), but the incremental framing distinguishes it implicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'previously indexed' implies a precondition — the version must already exist — and hints at using this instead of a fresh scrape. However, it never states when to prefer this over scrape_docs or to check status via find_version/job tools, leaving selection to inference.

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