Skip to main content
Glama
nuncaeslupus

doc-control

by nuncaeslupus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

server_help

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve JSON Schemas for a doc-control operation or every operation to learn required fields before calling it; omit the operation to list all. Read-only.

Instructions

Get the JSON Schemas of one operation (op, e.g. "para.get": its request schema and its result's output_schema), or of every operation when op is left out. A doc.batch kind ("comment.reply", "para.move"...) gives the fields it takes inside ops, under batch_operations; a name that is both gets both. Old names (before 0.7.0) give the renamed operation. Call it before using an operation whose fields you are unsure of; server.capabilities lists the operations. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opNoOperation or batch operation kind.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesAlways true on success.
opYesThe operation that ran.
apiYesAPI version (1.0).
docNoThe document read or written: path, sha256 and paragraph count.
nextYesCursor for the next page (pass as cursor), or null.
resultYesWhat the operation returns.
warningsYesThings to know about the result.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.2
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "api": {
+      "description": "API version (1.0).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "doc": {
+      "description": "The document read or written: path, sha256 and paragraph count.",
+      "properties": {
+        "characters": {
+          "description": "text.normalize of a text string: its length.",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "paragraphs": {
+          "description": "Body paragraphs.",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "path": {
+          "description": "Path of the document.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "sha256": {
+          "description": "sha256 of the file (pass as expect.sha256 to a write).",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "source": {
+          "description": "A .txt/.md/.odt source's format, encoding and split mode; \"text\" for a text string (text.normalize).",
+          "type": [
+            "object",
+            "string"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "next": {
+      "description": "Cursor for the next page (pass as cursor), or null.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Always true on success.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "op": {
+      "description": "The operation that ran.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "What the operation returns.",
+      "properties": {
+        "batch_operations": {
+          "description": "doc.batch kind -> {kind, summary, schema}.",
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "operations": {
+          "description": "Name -> {kind, summary, schema (JSON Schema of the request), and output_schema (of the result) when one operation is asked}.",
+          "type": "object"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "description": "Things to know about the result.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "api",
+    "ok",
+    "op",
+    "result",
+    "warnings",
+    "next"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Addedv0.1.3

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious behavior: batch kinds return batch_operations fields, old pre-0.7.0 names resolve to renamed operations, and names that are both return both. It is transparent about resolution edge cases beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core purpose and packs high information density with no filler. The semicolon-heavy, parenthetical-laden second half is dense but every clause (batch kinds, legacy names, the call-first advice) earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need not be re-explained, yet the description still clarifies what the schema contains (request schema and result output_schema). For a one-optional-param meta tool, the definition covers everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description enriches `op` well beyond the schema's terse 'Operation or batch operation kind': it gives example values ("para.get", "comment.reply"), covers batch-kind resolution, legacy names, and the omitted-`op` default. This corrects a schema that would otherwise under-describe a flexible param.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a precise verb (Get the JSON Schemas) and resource (one operation or every operation), and clarifies the dual behavior when `op` is omitted. It also distinguishes itself from server_capabilities, which lists operations rather than returning schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells the agent to call it before using an operation whose fields it is unsure of, and names the sibling alternative (server_capabilities lists the operations). The when-to-use and the routing to a sibling are both stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools