transkribus_coll_add_docsAdd multiple existing documents to a Transkribus collection by supplying collection and document IDs, with an option to move instead of copy.
Add multiple existing documents to a collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| collId | Yes | Collection ID | |
| docIds | Yes | Array of document IDs to add | |
| moveTo | No | Move instead of copy (default false) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.1.0v3.0.0v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already signal a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation; the description does not contradict them. It adds no extra detail about side effects such as duplicate behavior, permissions, or whether moveTo changes the operation, so it stays at baseline.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object, no filler. Every word earns its place for such a simple tool.
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?
Adequate for a straightforward bulk-add call because all parameters are documented and the purpose is unambiguous. However, with no output schema and no guidance on duplicates, preconditions, or failure behavior, an agent has to infer those from the API context.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents collId, docIds, and moveTo clearly. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description uses a specific verb ('add'), a clear resource ('existing documents'), and a target ('collection'). The plural 'multiple' signals this is the bulk variant of transkribus_coll_add_doc, distinguishing it without extra wording.
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?
It clearly states the operation is for multiple existing documents, which implies use when batching additions. It does not explicitly name the singular alternative transkribus_coll_add_doc or state when not to use this tool, but the context signal is strong enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.