Skip to main content
Glama

Read a Busabase guide

busabase_guide
Read-only

Read a Busabase guide. Call this BEFORE doing unfamiliar work — it carries the conventions this workspace expects, which no tool schema can express on its own. For a user's task, call playbooks_search first: it finds how THIS space's owners want the job done. These guides explain how Busabase itself works.

  • workspace — The change-request workflow: everyday tools, proposing structure, field types, starter blueprints, the revision loop, errors, and the untrusted-content rules.

  • airapp — REQUIRED before writing any AirApp file. The runtime contract (npm run dev, no bundler, no native binaries), a complete working example, reading workspace data, and the failure-log table.

  • setup — Guided first-run setup for a new workspace: pick a space, choose a blueprint, build the structure, and seed records in one change you can read back. Needs no terminal.

  • create-app — Guided AirApp creation, from the idea through one reviewable change request. Needs no terminal.

  • apps — the manuals for apps installed in THIS workspace

Reading airapp is REQUIRED before you write any AirApp file: an app that ignores its runtime contract does not start, and the two mistakes an agent makes by default (no dev script, a Vite/bundler scaffold) both produce an app that fails before rendering anything.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicYesWhich guide to read: workspace, airapp, setup, create-app, apps, or `skill:<slug>` for one installed app's own manual.
playbookNoOptional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.
targetSpaceIdNoBusabase space id. Call auth_verify first and ask the user which space to use when more than one is returned.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / playbook
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false), and the description goes beyond them by disclosing the cost of skipping the guide: 'an app that ignores its runtime contract does not start,' naming the two default mistakes (no `dev` script, bundler scaffold). It does not say how large the returned guide is or whether the content is paged, which is the only remaining behavioral gap.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the imperative and the routing rule, then a scannable bullet list of topics, which is the right shape for an enumeration. The closing paragraph restates the `airapp`-is-required rule already given in the bullet, so it is slightly redundant rather than wasteful.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by describing the subject matter of each guide so an agent knows what it will get back. What's missing is any statement about return size or how to consume the result (e.g. whether it is large enough to warrant reading selectively), which matters for a documentation-fetch tool.

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 100% and each parameter is already documented, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining what each `topic` value actually contains (workspace = change-request workflow, airapp = runtime contract plus failure-log table, setup/create-app = terminal-free guided flows, apps = manuals for installed apps). It still doesn't mention the `skill:<slug>` pattern, which lives only in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read a Busabase guide') and immediately scopes it against the nearest sibling by saying the guides 'explain how Busabase itself works' whereas playbooks_search finds how this space's owners want the job done. The per-topic breakdown makes the resource boundaries concrete.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use ('Call this BEFORE doing unfamiliar work'), an explicit alternative with its own selection rule ('For a user's task, call `playbooks_search` first'), and a hard precondition ('REQUIRED before writing any AirApp file'). Nothing about routing is left to inference.

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.