Skip to main content
Glama

Bucky

by com.buckybuild
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

save Lot

saveLot
Idempotent

Save one parcel by lotId without creating a project or running analysis. Copy lotId from a screenLots lot or assembly lot. Saving it again keeps the same save. Use preview=true first to inspect the request without writing.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lotIdYes
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
previewNoUse true to inspect the request without writing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / llm_model
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. \"claude-opus-4-8\", \"gpt-5.2\"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass \"unknown\" — never guess.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "lotId",
-  "context",
-  "llm_model"
-]New value: +[
+  "lotId",
+  "context"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description isn't carrying the safety burden. It still adds real value by spelling out that no project is created and no analysis is run, and by giving the idempotency hint concrete meaning ('Saving it again keeps the same save').

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its scope, followed by the identifier source and the preview workflow. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description covers the essential call contract: single-parcel save, idempotency, no side effects beyond saving, and a dry-run option. It could say slightly more about where the saved lot surfaces (listSaved/saved folders), but nothing critical to invoking it is absent.

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 67%, with lotId carrying only format/pattern and no prose. The description compensates by telling the agent where a valid lotId comes from (a screenLots lot or assembly lot) and by restating the dry-run meaning of preview=true.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Save one parcel by lotId') and bounds the scope by excluding project creation and analysis runs, which separates it from saveToProject and runFeasibilityAnalysis. It never names those siblings outright, so the differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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 gives a concrete prerequisite ('Copy lotId from a screenLots lot or assembly lot'), states the repeat-call behavior, and recommends 'Use preview=true first'. What's missing is an explicit statement of when to choose saveToProject instead of this tool for project-scoped saving.

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

All Bucky toolsInspect
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