transkribus_recog_train_la2Train a Layout Analysis 2 model for a collection by supplying a collection ID and training configuration parameters.
Start Layout Analysis 2 model training for a collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| collId | Yes | Collection ID | |
| config | Yes | Training configuration parameters |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but description does not elaborate on side effects like job creation, resource consumption, or expected duration. Does not clarify if training is synchronous or asynchronous.
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 wasted words, front-loaded with verb and resource.
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?
No output schema, description fails to mention that the tool likely returns a job ID or status. Does not address how to check training progress or retrieve the resulting model. Lacks completeness for a training initiator tool.
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 covers both parameters with basic descriptions, but the description adds no value beyond the schema. The 'config' parameter is a complex object with no structure defined; description should hint at required keys or provide example values.
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 'Start', the resource 'Layout Analysis 2 model training', and the scope 'for a collection'. It distinguishes from sibling training tools for other model types like HTR or table.
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 like transkribus_la_la2_inference or other training tools. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., existing training data) or that it initiates an asynchronous job.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.