transkribus_la_get_costsGet a cost estimate for layout analysis on a document. Provide collection and document IDs to retrieve pricing details.
Get the cost estimate for layout analysis on a document.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| docId | Yes | Document ID | |
| collId | Yes | Collection ID | |
| credits | No | Credits parameter | |
| modelId | No | Model/HTR ID | |
| nrOfPages | No | Number of pages |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as authorization requirements or rate limits, but does not contradict annotations.
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 sentence that efficiently communicates the purpose. It is concise without being overly minimal, though it could include a bit more detail without losing conciseness.
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?
Given the rich annotations and complete schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose. It does not explain return values, but for a cost estimate tool, the purpose is clear enough.
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 100% description coverage for all parameters. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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 clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'cost estimate', and the specific context 'layout analysis on a document'. This distinguishes it from similar cost tools like transkribus_credit_get_costs and transkribus_recog_get_costs.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple cost-related tools, and no exclusions or context are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.