Skip to main content
Glama

SBChart2.0 MCP

by kr.co.softbowl

getSBChartAPIDetail

Get the full documentation for one SBChart2.0 option/API by exact name: detailed explanation, HTML/JS usage, example, and warnings. Use after searchSBChartAPI. For a chart type's data structure, query its 'dataFormat' entry (e.g. 'Gantt 차트 데이터 포맷'). ⚠️ SBChart2.0 코드/샘플 생성 시 서버 공통지침(표준 골격에서 출발 · chartConfig 리터럴 나열 · 요청 기능만 최소 적용) 준수 — 상세는 서버 instructions 참고.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesExact option/API name as shown in searchSBChartAPI results (e.g. 'barFormat', 'Gantt 차트 데이터 포맷').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Exact option/API name"New value: +"Exact option/API name as shown in searchSBChartAPI results (e.g. 'barFormat', 'Gantt 차트 데이터 포맷')."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions returning documentation but does not explicitly disclose side effects, rate limits, or error handling. The warning about server guidelines is relevant but not a behavioral trait of the tool itself.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is two sentences plus a warning. It front-loads purpose but the warning at the end, while important, makes it slightly lengthy. Could be more concise.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and a specific example. It is complete enough for this simple tool, though it could mention what happens on invalid input.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by stating the name must be exact from searchSBChartAPI results, which reinforces the schema but does not add substantial new meaning.

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 clearly states it retrieves full documentation for one SBChart2.0 option/API by exact name, including detailed explanation, HTML/JS usage, example, and warnings. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'Use after searchSBChartAPI' and giving a usage pattern for data format queries.

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 explicitly says 'Use after searchSBChartAPI' and provides guidance on querying data structures. It could be stronger by stating when not to use, but the sequential context is clear.

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

All SBChart2.0 MCP 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct, non-overlapping purpose: search for APIs, browse by section, retrieve full documentation, and get code examples. No ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using CamelCase with the 'SBChart' prefix (e.g., searchSBChartAPI, getSBChartExample). No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools covering search, browse, detail, and example retrieval, the count is well-scoped for a documentation helper server. Not too few or too many.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the main workflows—finding APIs and retrieving documentation/examples. Minor gaps like version info or bulk listing are absent, but core functionality is solid.

Resources