Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bunpro MCP

Bunpro MCP

by Alexxanddr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_ghost_srs_details

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve SRS details for ghost-review vocabulary or grammar items to identify overdue study material and track progress.

Instructions

Get ghost-review SRS details

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": {
      "reviewable_type": "<reviewable_type>"
    },
    "name": "get_ghost_srs_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reviewable_typeYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing further: it does not explain what a "ghost review" is, what data is returned, or whether the result is scoped to the current user/session.

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?

A single four-word phrase with no padding, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency. Nothing is front-loaded because there is effectively no content.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description should describe the returned shape and the reviewable_type choice, and it does neither. Against a one-parameter read tool the gap is modest but still material given the crowded set of SRS siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single required parameter reviewable_type; only its enum (Vocab, Grammar) is machine-readable. The description never mentions the parameter or explains how choosing Vocab vs Grammar changes the result, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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

Purpose3/5

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

"Get ghost-review SRS details" names a verb and a resource, but "ghost-review" and "SRS details" are unexplained jargon, and the sibling list contains get_srs_level_details and get_self_study_srs_details with no indication of how this one differs. An agent cannot confidently pick this over its near-identical siblings from the text alone.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool, when not to, or which sibling (get_srs_level_details, get_self_study_srs_details, get_srs_overview) is the alternative. The reader must infer usage entirely from the name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools