Skip to main content
Glama

Revdoku

by com.revdoku

Bucket Lock Visibility Changes

bucket_lock_visibility_changes
Idempotent

Lock a bucket's visibility so it cannot be published, unpublished, switched between public/password access, or have its public URL changed by API or agents — use this to protect a bucket holding private data from accidental publishing. Locking is idempotent. There is deliberately no unlock tool: unlocking is web-UI-only and requires the user to type "confirm" in the Revdoku app, so if a bucket is visibility-locked you must ask the user to unlock it themselves.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bucket_idYesRevdoku bucket id returned by bucket_list or bucket_get, for example bkt_...

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bucketYes

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses important behavior beyond annotations: the lock blocks publishing, unpublishing, access changes, and public URL changes by API or agents, is idempotent, and is irreversible from the API side. Even though idempotentHint is annotated, the description adds meaningful context about the irreversible nature and the manual unlock flow.

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?

The description is compact yet information-dense. It front-loads the core action and restrictions, then provides the critical workflow caveat about unlocking in the second sentence. No wasted words.

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?

Given the single parameter, complete schema coverage, annotations, and output schema, the description covers all needed context: purpose, behavior, idempotency, and the unlock procedure. An agent can correctly decide when to invoke this tool and what to do when locked.

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% and the input schema already fully documents bucket_id, including its origin and example format. The tool description does not add parameter syntax details, but none are needed since the schema carries the burden adequately.

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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Lock a bucket's visibility' and lists exactly what operations are prevented. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling lock tools by focusing on visibility/publishing actions rather than file locks or general bucket locks.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it: 'use this to protect a bucket holding private data from accidental publishing.' It also gives a clear exclusion by explaining there is deliberately no unlock tool and instructing the agent to ask the user to unlock via the web UI.

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

All Revdoku toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few overlaps exist: bucket_file_move and bucket_file_rename both handle same-bucket renames/moves, and bucket_file_reorganize overlaps with copy/move operations. The detailed descriptions help clarify, but the boundaries aren't always obvious.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows predictable patterns: bucket_<verb> for bucket-level actions, bucket_file_<verb> for file operations, bucket_publication_<verb> for publications, and website_preview_* for previews. Minor deviations like bucket_create_from_template, bucket_set_public_slug, and bucket_update_publication_access deviate slightly but remain readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 42 tools, the server is overweight for its scope. While the platform is feature-rich, many tools are narrowly specialized (e.g., bucket_publication_leads, bucket_lock_visibility_changes) and some are redundant (file_move vs file_rename vs file_reorganize), making the surface larger than necessary for an MCP server.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers the full bucket lifecycle and most file operations, but there is no direct file delete tool (only via delete_missing in write_many or cross-bucket move soft-delete) and binary uploads are explicitly delegated to the CLI/REST. These are notable gaps for a complete file management workflow.

Resources