TAPD Data Fetcher
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| API_USER | Yes | Your TAPD API username | |
| API_PASSWORD | Yes | Your TAPD API password | |
| WORKSPACE_ID | Yes | Your TAPD project ID |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_tapd_storiesC | 获取TAPD平台指定项目的需求数据（支持分页） |
| get_tapd_bugsB | 获取TAPD平台指定项目的缺陷数据（支持分页） |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one fetches defect data (bugs) and the other fetches requirement data (stories) from TAPD. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool based on the data type needed.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get_tapd_' prefix followed by the data type (bugs, stories). The naming is predictable and adheres to snake_case throughout, providing clear and uniform identification.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a data fetcher scope. While bugs and stories are core entities, typical TAPD operations might include updates, searches, or other entity types (e.g., tasks, releases), suggesting an incomplete toolset that could limit agent workflows.
The server only provides read operations for two entity types (bugs and stories), lacking CRUD coverage (e.g., create, update, delete) and other common TAPD functionalities like filtering, sorting, or accessing additional resources. This creates significant gaps for comprehensive data management.