transkribus_recog_get_atrRetrieve available ATR model details to compare and select the right model for automatic text recognition tasks.
Retrieve information about available ATR (Automatic Text Recognition) models.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety properties. However, it adds no extra behavioral context beyond stating it retrieves info. With strong annotations, a 3 is appropriate.
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, no extraneous information, perfectly concise for the tool's complexity.
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 no parameters and a straightforward purpose (listing available models), the description is sufficiently complete. It could mention the return format but is adequate for selection.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. Per instructions, 0 params baseline is 4. The description correctly identifies the resource.
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 'retrieve' and the resource 'information about available ATR models', distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on specific models or run recognition tasks.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like transkribus_recog_list_models or transkribus_recog_get. While the purpose is clear, the description does not help select among similar tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.