BugSecure MCP

Get my BugSecure profile

get_my_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch your BugSecure researcher profile with account status, roles, reputation, and unread notifications. Optionally include report statistics, earnings, and monthly activity.

Instructions

The signed-in user’s BugSecure account and researcher profile: username, roles, whether the account is approved to submit reports, KYC status, level, reputation, streaks and unread notification count. With stats: true, also report counts by outcome and severity, earnings and monthly activity. Contact details are never returned. Badges: list_badges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stats`	No	Also return report statistics and the last 12 months of activity.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stats`	No	Only with stats: true, and null when BugSecure returns no statistics.
`account`	No
`researcherProfile`	No	Null for accounts without a researcher profile.
`unreadNotifications`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.0Sep 26, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / stats / description

Previous value: -"Only with stats: true."New value: +"Only with stats: true, and null when BugSecure returns no statistics."

changedOutput schema / properties / stats / properties / totalEarned / type
```
Previous value: -"integer"New value: +[
+  "integer",
+  "null"
+]
```

First observedv0.1.0Sep 25, 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, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds value by specifying that contact details are never returned (a privacy guarantee) and that badges are not included but are available via list_badges. This gives agents a clearer picture of what the tool does and does not return beyond the structured annotations.

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?

The description is concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds new information: first defines the core content, second explains the stats option, third clarifies exclusions (contact details) and points to list_badges. No wasted words; ideal length for this tool.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what is returned, what the stats flag does, and where to get badges (since they are not included). The presence of an output schema covers the return format. There are no missing pieces for correct invocation.

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 schema already documents the single 'stats' parameter with 100% coverage. The description goes beyond the schema by detailing what stats includes: report counts by outcome and severity, earnings, and monthly activity. This adds specificity not present in the schema's generic phrase 'report statistics and the last 12 months of activity.' The description effectively enhances the parameter's meaning.

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 tool returns the signed-in user's BugSecure account and researcher profile, enumerating specific fields (username, roles, approval status, KYC, level, reputation, streaks, unread notifications). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_researcher_profile by explicitly noting it's for the signed-in user, and points to list_badges for badges, which is a separate tool.

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?

The description provides usage context: it explains the optional stats parameter and when it adds extra data. It also tells users what not to expect (contact details never returned, badges via list_badges). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like get_researcher_profile for other users, but the 'signed-in user' phrasing makes that implicit. The guidance on the stats parameter is clear.

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