BagIQ MCP

build_minimal_bag

Extracts an optimal 3-to-5 disc minimalist setup from a larger bag, maximizing shot coverage while detailing necessary compromises. Accepts discs list or a BagIQ share link.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "build_minimal_bag"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`discs`	No	Full disc collection or bag (optional if share_url or share_id is provided)
`share_id`	No	Optional BagIQ short share ID (e.g. '4fisr8a7')
`share_url`	No	Optional BagIQ share link (e.g. 'https://app.bagiq.app/?s=4fisr8a7')
`target_count`	No	Target number of discs in the minimal bag (2..6, default 3)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / discs / description

Previous value: -"Full disc collection or bag"New value: +"Full disc collection or bag (optional if share_url or share_id is provided)"

addedInput schema / properties / share_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional BagIQ short share ID (e.g. '4fisr8a7')",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / share_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional BagIQ share link (e.g. 'https://app.bagiq.app/?s=4fisr8a7')",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "discs"
-]
```

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool produces an optimal setup with compromises, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, network fetching for share links, or that target_count may range beyond the stated 3-5 (schema allows 2-6).

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action; the second sentence covers input modes. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a tool with a complex nested discs schema and no output schema, the description defines the high-level goal but leaves the return shape and the target_count range unclear (3-5 vs 2-6). Input flexibility is mentioned, but output structure is not.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and every parameter has a description, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a high-level note that inputs can be 'discs list or a BagIQ share link', which is useful but not substantial; the '3-to-5' wording conflicts with target_count's 2..6 range.

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 states a specific verb ('Extracts'), a resource ('minimalist setup from a larger bag'), and an objective ('maximizing shot coverage while detailing necessary compromises'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like analyze_bag or find_bag_gaps by its output being a constructed minimal set.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage: when a user has a larger bag and wants a condensed setup. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, even though sibling tools like analyze_bag and recommend_bag_fillers exist.

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

All BagIQ MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?