Skip to main content
Glama

jp_lit_search_fulltext

Need to locate specific terms within digitized Japanese texts? Search OCR full-text and metadata across NDL Digital Collections, then use returned pids to pinpoint pages.

Instructions

external read / local bookkeeping write(非破壊)。次世代デジタルライブラリー収録資料を対象に OCR 全文テキストからキーワード検索する。デジコレ本体の全文検索画面/APIではなく、デジコレ本体の「ログインなしで閲覧可能」資料全体も対象ではない。館内限定・送信サービス限定資料を含め、公式検索画面の全文ヒットは網羅しない。網羅性が必要な調査では、この結果だけで「デジコレ全文にヒットなし」と断定せず、公式画面でのブラウザ検索・手動確認を併用する。searchfield=contentonly で本文のみ、metaonly でメタデータのみ、all で両方を検索。結果には pid が含まれ、特定資料内のページ特定は jp_lit_search_pages、ページ画像と OCR 座標確認は jp_lit_get_text_coordinates で行う 外部sourceは変更しない。cache hitでもlocal session履歴を更新し、cache missまたはforce_refreshではlocal cacheを作成・置換する。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fromNo検索結果の offset。0 始まり。
sizeNo返す資料候補の最大件数。最大 100。
f_ndcNo次世代デジタルライブラリー Book API の f-ndc filter。上位分類は 9* のような前方一致で指定する。9 のような1-2桁の数字だけを渡した場合は 9* に正規化する。空文字・空白だけの値は未指定扱いにする。
keywordYesNDL デジタルコレクション公開範囲の OCR / メタデータから探す語。
session_idYes調査案件を識別する application state handle。jp_lit_start_session が返した値を渡す。形式は YYYY-MM-DD-HHMMSS-8桁hex(旧形式 YYYY-MM-DD-HHMMSS も可)。MCP transport の接続IDや cache_key とは別物。
searchfieldNo検索対象。contentonly は本文 OCR、metaonly はメタデータ、all は両方。contentonly
fc_is_classicNo古典籍フラグで絞る場合に指定する。
force_refreshNotrue の場合はローカル cache を使わず upstream API から再取得する。false の場合は保存済み cache を優先する。

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rawYes
fromYes
cacheNo
itemsYes
totalYes
keywordYes
searchfieldYes
Install Server

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial context beyond annotations: it clarifies that readOnlyHint=false means 'external read / local bookkeeping write (non-destructive)', explicitly states external sources are unchanged, and details the cache side-effect semantics (cache hit updates session history; cache miss or force_refresh creates/replaces local cache). This resolves the apparent tension of readOnlyHint=false with a non-destructive operation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 dense and front-loads the core purpose, with every sentence carrying substantive information. However, it is a single run-on paragraph mixing purpose, exclusions, param semantics, sibling routing, and cache behavior; '外部sourceは変更しない' partially repeats the opening 'external read / local bookkeeping write' claim. Line breaks or topic separation would improve scannability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with significant coverage caveats, this is remarkably complete. It captures the critical failure mode (false 'no hits' conclusions from incomplete coverage) and prescribes the mitigation. Combined with the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, exclusions, param behavior, sibling routing, and side effects. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds a small amount of param context (searchfield=contentonly 本文のみ/metaonly メタデータのみ/all 両方, and force_refresh cache semantics), but these largely mirror what the schema already documents. It does not meaningfully compensate beyond the schema's existing descriptions.

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?

The description states a specific verb+resource: keyword search (キーワード検索する) over OCR full text (OCR 全文テキスト) in the next-generation digital library. It also differentiates itself from the main Digital Collection full-text search screen/API and from sibling tools like jp_lit_search and jp_lit_search_kokusho_fulltext by declaring what it is NOT.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: it covers next-gen library OCR, but not the main Digital Collection API, not login-free materials, and not library-restricted/transmission-service materials. It warns against concluding 'no hits' from this tool alone and instructs combining with official browser search. It also routes to specific siblings: jp_lit_search_pages for page identification and jp_lit_get_text_coordinates for OCR coordinates.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/itarunnn/jp-lit-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server