transkribus_kws_get_keywordsRetrieve keywords for a keyword spotting query to locate relevant terms in transcribed documents, enabling targeted search and analysis.
Get keywords for a keyword spotting query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Resource ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but does not contradict them. With rich annotations, the description's contribution is minimal.
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?
The description is a single, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient.
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?
The tool has a single parameter and no output schema. Annotations cover safety. The description is minimal but sufficient to indicate the basic function. However, it does not explain what the returned keywords look like or provide context about keyword spotting queries, which could be helpful for an agent.
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?
The input schema has one parameter 'id' with description 'Resource ID'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3.
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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'keywords for a keyword spotting query'. It is specific and distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like transkribus_kws_create_query or transkribus_kws_get_hits.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any context about prerequisites or use cases. The description is minimal and provides no exclusions or when-not-to-use information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.