Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bloom MCP

Bloom MCP

by cotlet-connect
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

bloom_type

Types text into a numbered field on the current Bloom page, enabling agents to fill specific form inputs during client, invoice, or contract workflows.

Instructions

Type text into a numbered field on the current Bloom page.

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": {
      "element": "<element>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "bloom_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to type.
elementYesField number from the last read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for a mutating action. It does not disclose whether typing replaces or appends to existing field content, whether it focuses or clicks the field first, whether a submit/Enter occurs, or what happens with an invalid element number.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves behavioral questions unanswered rather than because every needed detail was packed in.

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 two-parameter input tool with full schema coverage, the definition is minimally adequate. It omits the mutation semantics (replace vs append), the prerequisite of an open/read page, and, since there is no output schema, any indication of what is returned after typing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, and the description only echoes the notion of a 'numbered field'. The schema itself contributes the useful detail that the number comes from the last read, so the description adds no meaning beyond the baseline.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: type text into a numbered field on the current Bloom page. That is clearly distinct from click/read/status siblings by implication, but no sibling is named or explicitly contrasted, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'current Bloom page' suggests a page must already be open, and the schema's 'field number from the last read' implies a prior read. The description itself never states prerequisites, when to prefer this over bloom_click, or what to do if no page is open.

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