dotbugi-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

저장 위치 확인

get_storage_dir

Read-only

Retrieves the current storage directory and semester folder path where lecture materials, assignment attachments, and STT results are saved.

Instructions

강의자료·과제 첨부·STT 결과를 저장하는 위치와 이번 학기 폴더를 알려준다. 자료는 <저장 위치>/<YYYY-N학기>/<과목>/<N주차>/ 에 쌓인다 (3~~8월 1학기, 9~~2월 2학기). 바꾸려면 set_storage_dir.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_storage_dir"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`root`	Yes	저장 위치
`isDefault`	Yes	기본 위치(~/Downloads/dotbugi-mcp)면 true
`semesterDir`	Yes	이번 학기 폴더 (<저장 위치>/<YYYY-N학기>)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the directory convention <저장 위치>/<YYYY-N학기>/<과목>/<N주차>/ and the month boundaries that define each semester, which an agent needs in order to interpret the result.

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 compact sentences plus a parenthetical: what it returns first, then the path format, then the redirect to the setter. Nothing is repeated and the destination of the answer is front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not describe return values, and it still supplies the path grammar and semester semantics needed to read them. For a zero-parameter, read-only lookup this covers everything required to invoke it correctly.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this is a 4. The description correctly spends no words on parameters and instead documents the path convention the (param-less) call will describe.

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?

States a specific verb (알려준다 / reports) plus a specific resource (the storage location for lecture materials, assignment attachments and STT output, including the current-semester folder). It also spells out the concrete path template, so an agent can tell exactly what this returns versus sibling tools like get_status.

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?

Explicitly routes the write case to the alternative: '바꾸려면 set_storage_dir' clearly separates read from configure. It gives no guidance on when this is not needed (e.g. versus get_status) and no prerequisite conditions, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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