Skip to main content
Glama

Get the Bucky MCP guide

getBuckyMcpGuide
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return a static guide to the Bucky MCP surface: what works without sign-in, how to start OAuth by calling a gated tool, how to connect Cursor or the CLI with a real account, and feasibility safety rules. Makes no database, geocoding, AI, or third-party API call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description explicitly states it 'Makes no database, geocoding, AI, or third-party API call' and calls itself static. This adds concrete behavioral specificity about side-effect-freedom and the absence of external dependencies.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the guide's contents; the second adds a meaningful behavioral guarantee. Every clause 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?

For a static read-only guide tool, the description is complete: it specifies the topics covered, confirms no external calls, and all parameter semantics live in the schema. No output schema exists, but the nature of a guide makes its return format secondary.

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 description coverage is 100%; the required 'context' parameter is fully documented in the schema with length, perspective, and privacy guidance. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return a static guide to the Bucky MCP surface.' It then enumerates the guide's content areas, which clearly distinguishes it from the feasibility and project-analysis sibling tools.

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?

The description makes the intended use clear by listing what the guide covers (sign-in behavior, OAuth, Cursor/CLI connection, safety rules). It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the tool's unique guide purpose is evident enough that an agent can route to it correctly.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: explanation, guide, snapshot, context, report, analysis run, save, feedback, status check, and update. The only overlap is between getProjectContext and uiGetAnalysisStatus, but the description explicitly clarifies that getProjectContext is preferred, making the distinction unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowerCamelCase verb_Noun pattern (e.g., getFeasibilitySnapshot, runFeasibilityAnalysis, produceProjectReport). Minor variations like saveToProject and uiGetAnalysisStatus still adhere to the same structural style, so naming is predictable and uniform.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the server covers the full project lifecycle—lookup, creation, analysis, reporting, status, updates, and feedback—without redundancy or bloat. The count is well-scoped for the stated domain of property feasibility analysis.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered: create project, attach lots/references, run analysis, retrieve context, update metadata, and generate reports. Major gaps include no list-projects operation and no delete/archive capability, though the documentation explicitly notes these are unsupported on this surface, making them expected limitations rather than operational dead ends.

Resources