Skip to main content
Glama

bitpull_site_info

Read-only

Retrieve a site folder's published address, associated databases, and connected accounts by providing its absolute path.

Instructions

Where a site folder is published (address) and which databases it has, plus the connected accounts.

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": {
      "folder": "<folder>"
    },
    "name": "bitpull_site_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
folderYesAbsolute path of the folder

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the description need not restate that. It does add useful value by disclosing the information returned (address, databases, accounts) since there is no output schema, but it omits behavior when the folder is not a published site or an invalid path.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no filler, which is good. But it is a noun-phrase fragment with no leading verb, so the action is never front-loaded and the agent must infer that this is a read operation from annotations alone.

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?

For a simple, single-parameter read tool, the description covers the main return contents, which compensates somewhat for the absent output schema. It still leaves gaps on when to prefer this over sibling account/database tools and on error behavior for unpublished folders.

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% and the single parameter is documented as an absolute folder path. The description adds only the implication that the folder should be a published site folder, which is marginal context beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description names the resource (a site folder) and enumerates what it reports: publish address, databases, connected accounts. However, it has no verb and reads as a list of return fields rather than stating the action (retrieve/fetch info). It also overlaps with the sibling bitpull_site_accounts on 'connected accounts' without differentiating.

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 when-to-use guidance is present. The description never says to use this tool when you need to inspect a site's publish target or database bindings, nor does it name an alternative such as bitpull_site_accounts for the accounts portion.

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