Retrieve recent FastOCR documents with their processing status and page counts to monitor OCR jobs and identify documents ready for review.
List the most recent documents in the FastOCR account with their status and page counts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | How many documents to return, newest first (1 to 100). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context — results are newest-first and scoped to a single account — but stops short of noting that there is no pagination/cursor, meaning older documents are reachable only by raising the limit.
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 sentence with zero filler, front-loading the verb and resource and then the return payload. Nothing in it could be cut without losing information.
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 and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. The only meaningful omission is the absence of pagination semantics, which matters for a capped-limit listing tool.
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?
With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents limit, its 1–100 range, and its default. The description's 'most recent' phrasing reinforces the newest-first ordering but adds no syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema.
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 and resource (list documents) and adds scope ('most recent', 'in the FastOCR account') plus the returned fields (status, page counts). It is clearly distinct from get_document/delete_document by name and behavior, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.
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?
Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the overview/listing call and get_document is the single-item call, but the description never says when to choose one over the other. There are no stated exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.