Bitbucket MCP Server

getPipelineStep

Retrieve detailed information about a specific pipeline step in Bitbucket by providing the workspace, repository, pipeline UUID, and step UUID.

Instructions

Get details for a specific pipeline step

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "repo_slug": "<repo_slug>",
      "pipeline_uuid": "<pipeline_uuid>",
      "step_uuid": "<step_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "getPipelineStep"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`repo_slug`	Yes	Repository slug
`step_uuid`	Yes	Step UUID
`workspace`	Yes	Bitbucket workspace name
`pipeline_uuid`	Yes	Pipeline UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.7May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It only says 'Get details' without disclosing authentication needs, error handling, or side effects. For a read operation, it should at least imply idempotence or safety.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with 8 words. It is concise and front-loaded, but could benefit from additional structured information given the number of parameters and siblings.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given zero output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'details' includes, any prerequisites, or how the tool behaves in edge cases (e.g., missing step UUID).

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation but not exceeding it.

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 'Get details for a specific pipeline step' with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like getPipelineSteps (list) and getPipelineStepLogs (logs) by focusing on a single step's details.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getPipelineSteps or getPipelineStepLogs. The description does not mention context or exclusion criteria.

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

Deploy Server