Florence-2 MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

ocr

Extract text from image files and URLs via optical character recognition. Ideal for screenshots, scanned documents, and photos.

Instructions

Process an image file or URL using OCR to extract text.

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": {
      "src": "<src>"
    },
    "name": "ocr"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`src`	Yes	A file path or URL to the image file that needs to be processed.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.14Jun 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "title": "Result",
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "title": "ocrOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 21, 2025

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. It is too minimal for a tool without annotations.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded, with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema (not detailed here), the description covers the essential input and action. It could mention output format, but overall adequate for a straightforward OCR tool.

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% for the lone parameter, which already describes 'src' as a file path or URL. The tool description adds no extra meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action (OCR) and the resource (image file or URL) and the output (extract text). It distinguishes from sibling tool 'caption' which likely does a different task.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or compare with sibling 'caption'.

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

Deploy Server

ocr