Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bangumi MCP

Bangumi MCP

by etherwindy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

patch_my_episode_collections

Idempotent

Update episode collection statuses in bulk for a given anime subject, setting each episode to a chosen state like want to watch, watched, or dropped.

Instructions

为当前用户批量更改剧集收藏状态

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": {
      "subject_id": "<subject_id>",
      "episode_id": "<episode_id>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "patch_my_episode_collections"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subject_idYes条目ID
episode_idYes剧集ID列表
typeYes收藏类型：0=未收藏，1=想看，2=看过，3=抛弃

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), no destruction, idempotent, and open world. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'batch change'. With annotations provided, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. No superfluous words, but could benefit from slight elaboration on the batch aspect.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details. It is minimally complete for a batch update tool.

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 all three parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 stands.

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 (batch change), resource (episode collection status), and scope (for current user). It distinguishes from siblings like put_my_episode_collection_info which likely handles single episodes, but does not explicitly contrast.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like put_my_episode_collection_info for individual updates or patch_my_collection for subject-level changes. The description implies batch operation but does not specify prerequisites or typical use cases.

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