Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HomarUScc

HomarUScc

by kcdjmaxx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

spaces_create_bucket

Create a Spaces bucket to organize items, optionally nested under a parent, with custom colors, statuses, and descriptions.

Instructions

Create a new Spaces bucket (optionally nested under a parent)

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": "spaces_create_bucket"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesBucket name
colorNoHex color (optional)
parentIdNoParent bucket ID for nesting (optional)
statusesNoCustom status values (default: ['open', 'done'])
descriptionNoBucket description (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the creation action and optional nesting, but fails to disclose side effects, permissions, idempotency, or response format. This is a significant gap for a mutation 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?

Single sentence, 10 words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place; zero redundancy.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and only a one-sentence description, the tool is under-specified. The agent gets no information about return values, error conditions, or behavior on duplicate names. The schema covers inputs but not outcomes, leaving the description incomplete.

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%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, only reinforcing the parent nesting aspect already captured by parentId. 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?

Description clearly states the action (Create) and resource (Spaces bucket), with the optional nesting detail. It distinguishes from sibling tools like spaces_add_item (adding an item) and spaces_list_buckets/get_bucket (reading buckets).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage (to create a bucket) but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like spaces_add_item or spaces_update_item. There is no mention of exclusions or conditions beyond optional nesting.

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