biz.dfch.SpecMgr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get verification case record

get_vcr

Retrieve and parse a verification case record document by ID, returning frontmatter and body, or the raw body text with optional line offset, limit, and numbering.

Instructions

Read, parse, and return a full verification case record document (frontmatter and body) by its id. Pass raw=True to return the frontmatter-stripped body text verbatim instead. With raw=True, optional read-style offset/limit window the raw read: offset (1-based, default 1) is the first body line to return, limit (line count, default through end of body) how many; out-of-range values clamp (offset > N returns the empty string), and coordinates with raw=False raise ValueError. A document that exists but fails to parse returns a ParseFailureResult (error/path/id) instead of raising; its error text is byte-identical to the domain's own list tool's failed-row error for the same file (identical field path and cause, including the trailing pydantic documentation line; ADR 9080b37c-82b3-4f63-81f1-79641d0bf14c). An invalid id (path-injection attempt or wrong format) is also a ValueError, raised before any file access. With raw=True, an optional numbered=True prefixes every returned body line with its 1-based absolute body-line number in the "<n>: " form (plain decimal, no padding) -- under offset/limit windowing the numbers start at the clamped offset and never restart at 1, so a number seen in the output can be fed straight back into the generic update tool's offset. numbered is meaningful only with raw=True: combining it with raw=False raises ValueError (like offset/limit), and a numbered read of a document that fails to parse returns the ParseFailureResult described above, never numbered text. Numbered output must never be fed back verbatim into content for update or create_vcr -- strip the "<n>: " prefix from each line first (it is likewise never a valid edit old_str).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`raw`	No
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`numbered`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.36.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses parse-failure behavior (ParseFailureResult on unparseable docs), that invalid ids raise ValueError before file access, clamping semantics for out-of-range offsets, and cross-tool coupling with the update create_vcr tools.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded and logically ordered, but it is dense with parenthetical caveats, an ADR reference, and repeated restatements of the byte-identical error behavior, which slows scanning for an agent needing only the core call semantics.

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 5-param read tool with output schema coverage, the description is nearly complete: it covers mode selection, windowing, numbering, error behavior, and safety warnings. The main omission is an explicit statement of when to use this tool versus the many get_vcr* siblings, which leaves a small routing gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it explains raw, offset (1-based default 1), limit, and numbered, including defaults and error conditions. Minor gaps remain: the exact id format isn't specified beyond 'wrong format', and the interaction between raw=False and offset/limit beyond the ValueError is thin.

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+resource: 'Read, parse, and return a full verification case record document (frontmatter and body) by its id.' It distinguishes the dual modes (raw=False vs raw=True) precisely and even names the affected sibling ('update') in the routing guidance.

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?

Clear conditional usage is given for raw=True, offset/limit, and numbered, including which combinations raise ValueError. However it never explicitly tells the agent when to prefer this over get_vcr_example, get_vcr_template, or parse_vcr siblings, so cross-sibling routing is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server