Glean Connector MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_connector

Scaffold a new Glean connector project using a standard template and set the active project directory for your session.

Instructions

Scaffold a new Glean connector project using the standard template. Call this after get_started. Sets the active project directory for this session.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_connector"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Name for the new connector (e.g. "salesforce-opportunities")
`description`	No	Short description of what this connector indexes
`datasource_type`	No	Connector base class type (only applies to datasource category)	basic
`parent_directory`	No	Directory to create the connector in. Defaults to cwd.
`connector_category`	No	Type of connector: datasource (default) or people	datasource

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. It discloses a side effect ('Sets the active project directory') but lacks details on permissions, error conditions, or idempotency.

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 with no redundancy. First sentence gives core purpose, second adds prerequisite and side effect. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With 5 parameters fully documented in schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: ordering and side effect. Could optionally detail scaffolding output files, but current is sufficient.

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% with adequate parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter context beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline.

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 verb 'scaffold' and resource 'new Glean connector project', and distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_started' by explicitly indicating the sequence ('Call this after get_started').

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?

Provides clear context by stating to call after get_started, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools like build_connector or run_connector.

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