bw-modeling-mcp

bw_list_datasources

List all DataSources (RSDS) under a logical source system by recursively traversing the APCO hierarchy. Optionally filter by an APCO path subtree to narrow results.

Instructions

List all DataSources (RSDS) available under a logical source system. Recursively traverses the full application component (APCO) hierarchy — may take time for large systems. Returns each DataSource with name, source_system, description, status, self_url, and apco_path (ordered list of application component titles from root to the DataSource). Optional apco_path_filter restricts the result to a hierarchy subtree and also prunes traversal.

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": {
      "source_system": "<source_system>"
    },
    "name": "bw_list_datasources"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`format`	No	Output format. "text" (default): compact plain-text table. "raw": raw XML feed bodies from BW.
`source_system`	Yes	Logical source system name (e.g. "LSYS_NAME"). Case-insensitive.
`apco_path_filter`	No	Optional APCO hierarchy filter. A contiguous sequence of APCO names, "/"-style separated by ">". May start at any depth in the hierarchy (not root-anchored). Example: "LEVEL_1 > LEVEL_2" returns every DataSource that lives under a path containing LEVEL_1 directly followed by LEVEL_2. Each segment matches case-insensitively against the APCO display title OR the technical APCO name (trimmed). A single segment like "IS-U" returns all DataSources under any APCO subtree named "IS-U", at any depth.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses recursive traversal and possible slowness. Describes the return fields and the filter behavior. With no annotations, this provides sufficient behavioral insight for a read-only list tool.

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?

Two sentences front-loading core purpose, then providing detail on traversal, output, and optional filter. No wasted words.

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?

Covers all necessary aspects: resource type, scope, behavior (recursive, slow), output fields, filter syntax, and default format. Lacks only pagination/limits, but this is acceptable for such a tool.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: explains apco_path_filter with example, notes case-insensitivity for source_system, and confirms default format. Schema covers all params, but description enriches usage.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'DataSources (RSDS)' under a logical source system. Distinguishes itself from siblings like bw_get_datasource by listing all vs. single, and bw_search by focusing on hierarchy traversal.

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?

Contextually clear when to use (listing all datasources under a system) and mentions potential performance impact for large systems. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but the purpose implies distinct use from single-resource tools.

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

Deploy Server