Skip to main content
Glama
ZYHB

Feishu MCP Server

by ZYHB
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

create_bitable_app

Create a Feishu Bitable application to organize data in multidimensional tables. Specify a name and optional folder location to generate an app with unique token for structured data management.

Instructions

    创建多维表格应用

    参数:
        name: 多维表格名称
        folder_token: (可选) 文件夹token，指定创建位置

    返回:
        JSON格式的应用信息，包含app_token等

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
folder_tokenNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • src/yuppie_mcp_feishu/tools/bitable_app.py:19-41 (handler)
    The core handler function for the 'create_bitable_app' tool. It uses the Lark API to create a Bitable app with the given name and optional folder token, returning the JSON response.
    @mcp.tool()
@handle_feishu_error
def create_bitable_app(name: str, folder_token: str = "") -> str:
    """
    创建多维表格应用

    参数:
        name: 多维表格名称
        folder_token: (可选) 文件夹token，指定创建位置

    返回:
        JSON格式的应用信息，包含app_token等
    """
    client = get_client()
    request = (
        CreateAppRequest.builder()
        .request_body(
            lark.App.builder().name(name).folder_token(folder_token).build()
        )
        .build()
    )
    response = client.bitable.v1.app.create(request)
    return lark.JSON.marshal(response.data, indent=4)
  • src/yuppie_mcp_feishu/__init__.py:20-20 (registration)
    Registers the Bitable app tools, including 'create_bitable_app', by calling the registration function on the MCP server instance.
    register_bitable_app_tools(mcp)
  • src/yuppie_mcp_feishu/tools/bitable_app.py:16-18 (registration)
    The registration function that defines and registers the 'create_bitable_app' tool (and copy) using @mcp.tool() decorators.
    def register_bitable_app_tools(mcp: FastMCP):
    """注册多维表格应用工具"""

Tool Definition Quality

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it creates an application and returns JSON with app_token, which implies a write operation with a specific output. However, it lacks critical behavioral details: it doesn't mention permissions needed, whether this is idempotent, rate limits, or what happens if the name already exists. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first line states the purpose clearly, followed by parameter and return sections. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words. However, the structure could be slightly more polished (e.g., bullet points), but it's efficient.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (returns JSON with app_token), the description doesn't need to explain return values in detail. It covers the basic purpose and parameters adequately. However, as a creation tool with no annotations, it should ideally mention more about behavioral aspects like permissions or idempotency to be fully complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful semantics: it explains that 'name' is the multi-dimensional table name and 'folder_token' is optional for specifying the creation location. This clarifies beyond the schema's basic titles, though it doesn't detail format constraints (e.g., length limits for name). With 0% coverage, this is good but not exhaustive.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb '创建' (create) and resource '多维表格应用' (multi-dimensional table application), making the purpose explicit. It distinguishes from siblings like 'copy_bitable_app' or 'create_bitable_record' by specifying it creates an application rather than copying or creating records. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings, so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when this tool is appropriate versus other creation tools, or any exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and context alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ZYHB/yuppie-mcp-feishu'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server