transkribus_page_get_textRetrieve the transcript text for a specific page using collection, document, and page numbers. Access transcribed text for any page in a Transkribus document.
Get the transcript text for a specific page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Document ID | |
| page | Yes | Page number | |
| collId | Yes | Collection ID |
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=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotation flags, such as return format or pagination.
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 is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise with no wasted words.
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 simplicity of the tool and rich annotations, the description is adequate but does not explain how 'transcript text' differs from other page text tools or provide return value details. Slightly more context would improve completeness.
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 description coverage is 100% with all three parameters (collId, id, page) having descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific information, so baseline score of 3 applies.
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 'transcript text for a specific page'. It is specific and unambiguous, but does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like transkribus_page_get_plaintext or transkribus_page_get_transcript, which may confuse selection.
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 is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.