Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bw-modeling-mcp

bw-modeling-mcp

by dnic-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

bw_create_transport_task

Add a user-specific task to an existing workbench transport request, returning the created task number.

Instructions

Add a task (sub-request) for a user to an existing workbench transport request. Single ADT call, no lock or activation. The parent request must be modifiable. Returns the created task number.

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": {
      "transport_request": "<transport_request>",
      "user": "<user>"
    },
    "name": "bw_create_transport_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userYesTarget user the task is created for (task owner), e.g. "USERNAME".
transport_requestYesParent workbench transport request number (e.g. DEVK900123).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.2.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the call is a single ADT call, no lock or activation, and returns the created task number. It does not detail side effects or error conditions, but for a creation tool, it provides reasonable behavioral insight.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description mentions the return value ('Returns the created task number'). It covers prerequisites (modifiable parent) and the call's nature. For a simple two-parameter creation tool, it is complete.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond examples; it mostly restates the parameter purposes. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Add a task'), the resource ('sub-request for a user to an existing workbench transport request'), and context. It distinguishes from sibling tools, none of which create transport tasks.

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 provides guidance on when it can be used ('parent request must be modifiable') and notes the call is single and has no lock or activation. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it.

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