doco_translationsRetrieve a document's translation details, including its document set, source language, available language versions, and update freshness for each language.
读取一个具体文档的 Document Set、源语言、可用语言版本和每种语言的新鲜度。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| document_id | Yes | Target document ID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description's mention of '读取' aligns with these, but it adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotations. With annotations present, the bar is lower, so a score of 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?
The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. It is concise and well-structured.
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?
The description provides sufficient context for a simple read operation, identifying the specific data points returned. However, it does not mention output format or any potential errors, but that is not critical for a read-only tool with no output schema.
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 only parameter, document_id, is described in the schema as 'Target document ID.' The tool description does not add further explanation or context for the parameter. Since schema coverage is 100%, a baseline score of 3 is warranted.
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 tool reads a specific document's Document Set, source language, available language versions, and freshness. It uses the verb '读取' (read) and specifies the resource, distinguishing it from other document-related tools.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or situations where this tool is preferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.