mcp-databnf

List the editions of a work

list_editions

Read-onlyIdempotent

List published editions of a BnF work by its identifier, showing publisher, place, year, ISBN, catalogue record, and digitised link when available.

Instructions

List the published editions of one work in the Bibliothèque nationale de France catalogue, by the identifier search_works or get_work returns. Each row carries the publisher, the place, the year, the edition statement, the extent in the words of the record, the ISBN when there is one, and the record in the BnF general catalogue. An edition that has been digitised carries a link under 'digitised'. That link says a copy exists at that address; this server never opens it, so it cannot say whether the document is readable, complete, or free to reuse. Rows are ordered by the address the catalogue gives each edition, which is neither by date nor by importance.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`limit`	No
`work_id`	Yes	The work identifier, such as 'cb11970626n'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	Yes
`notes`	Yes
`work_id`	Yes
`editions`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes
`retrieved_at`	Yes	When these metadata were read from data.bnf.fr, as an ISO 8601 instant. The BnF licence asks for this date to be stated wherever the metadata are shown, so repeat it alongside the source.
`digitised_count`	Yes	Editions on this page carrying at least one link.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv1.1.0Aug 10, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / editions / items / properties / digitised / items / properties / rendering

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "The view the address asks Gallica for, read off what follows the ARK name in it, such as 'thumbnail' for a small image or 'item' for one leaf. Null when the address names the document itself. This says what was asked for, not what comes back."
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / editions / items / properties / digitised / items / properties / url / description

Previous value: -"Open this to see the document. This server does not read it."New value: +"The address the catalogue publishes, for a person to open. Read it beside 'rendering': an address asking for a rendering opens that view of the document rather than the document. This server does not read either."

changedOutput schema / properties / editions / items / properties / digitised / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "ark",
-  "url",
-  "role",
-  "from_id",
-  "from_title"
-]New value: +[
+  "ark",
+  "url",
+  "rendering",
+  "role",
+  "from_id",
+  "from_title"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / editions / items / properties / place / description

Added value: +"The place of publication as the record writes it, square brackets included. '[Paris]' is a place the cataloguer supplied because the item does not print one, and '[S.l.]' is an item stating no place at all."

addedOutput schema / properties / editions / items / properties / publisher / description

Added value: +"The publisher as the record writes it, square brackets included. A bracketed part is the cataloguer speaking rather than the item: '[s.n.]' is a publisher the item does not name, and a role such as '[éd., distrib.]' is what the named house did rather than part of its name."

First observedv1.0.0Aug 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that digitised editions carry a link that is never opened by the server, so no guarantee is given about readability or reuse. It also reveals that rows are ordered by catalogue address rather than date or importance, which is non-obvious behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a compact three sentences. It front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently details the row contents and important caveats without redundancy.

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?

For a list-with-pagination tool, the description covers purpose, output fields, digitisation caveat, ordering, and identifier provenance. The existing annotations and output schema cover the remaining safety and return structure details, making it contextually complete.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The description clarifies that work_id is an identifier returned by search_works or get_work, giving it meaningful context beyond its schema description. However, page and limit are not mentioned in the description, leaving their semantics only in the schema; given the low schema coverage (33%), this is a gap.

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?

The description clearly states a specific action: 'List the published editions of one work' in the BnF catalogue, and specifies the input identifier from search_works or get_work. This differentiates it from sibling tools that list or search for works.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It signals that the tool is appropriate when you already have a work identifier from search_works or get_work, and it describes what is returned. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives like find_digitised for digitised copies, so it has clear context but no exclusions.

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

Deploy Server