Skip to main content
Glama

qbit_manage_config

Manage qbit_manage configuration files through operations that create, update, validate, backup, restore, list, and delete configs.

Instructions

qbit manage config operations on qbit_manage. Pass operation and an arguments dict matching that operation's parameters.

  • qbit_manage_backup_config(filename) — Create a timestamped manual backup of a config file (keeps up to 30 per config). WRITE: this modifies your qbit_manage instance.

  • qbit_manage_create_config(filename, body={}) — Create a new config file (body is {"data": }). Returns 409 if the file already exists. WRITE: this modifies your qbit_manage instance.

  • qbit_manage_delete_config(filename) — Delete a config file permanently (a backup is created before deletion). DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data.

  • qbit_manage_get_config(filename) — Fetch a parsed config file. data mirrors the YAML structure; !ENV references are preserved as "!ENV ".

  • qbit_manage_list_config_backups(filename) — List available backups for a config file, newest first.

  • qbit_manage_list_configs() — List available config files in the config directory (sensitive files like qbm_settings.yml are filtered out).

  • qbit_manage_restore_config_from_backup(filename) — Load a backup by name (filename is the backup file name in the path, e.g. config_20260521_100000.yml) and return its data for restoring.

  • qbit_manage_update_config(filename, body={}) — Update an existing config file (body is {"data": }); a timestamped backup is auto-created before writing. WRITE: this modifies your qbit_manage instance.

  • qbit_manage_validate_config(filename, body={}) — Validate a config through the parser without executing (body is {"data": }); defaults backfilled during validation are written back to the real config.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
argumentsNo
operationYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility, and it excels: it labels WRITE and DESTRUCTIVE operations, notes that backups are auto-created before deletion/update, mentions the 409 response for existing files, discloses that sensitive files are filtered, states that !ENV references are preserved, and warns that validation writes backfilled defaults to the real config.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long due to nine operations, but each line follows a consistent, compact format: operation name, parameters, and behavior. The opening sentence explains the pattern, and every entry earns its place with necessary detail. Nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a complex, multi-operation config tool, the description covers every operation's input, side effects, and notable return/behavior details (e.g., newest-first backups, 409 conflict, preservation of !ENV). An output schema exists for return values, so the absence of exhaustive return descriptions is acceptable. An agent can correctly select and invoke any listed operation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the arguments parameter is a generic object, but the description gives each operation's signature, explains the body format as {'data': <config dict>}, and clarifies filename semantics for restore. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 opens with 'qbit manage config operations on qbit_manage' and then enumerates nine distinct config-related operations with specific verbs (backup, create, delete, get, list, restore, update, validate) and resources (config files, backups). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like qbit_manage_commands or qbit_manage_logs.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description conveys clear context: this tool is for qbit_manage config files. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide 'use this when' guidance, but the scope is unambiguous and the operation list makes applicable situations obvious. It stops short of 5 because no when-not-to-use or sibling comparisons are stated.

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