Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
google-cloud-console-mcp

google-cloud-console-mcp

by kutleloove
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get bucket metadata

gcs_get_bucket

Fetch metadata such as location, storage class, and versioning for a Google Cloud Storage bucket by name.

Instructions

Fetches metadata (location, storage class, versioning, etc.) for a bucket.

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": {
      "bucket": "<bucket>"
    },
    "name": "gcs_get_bucket"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bucketYesBucket name (without gs:// prefix)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose what is returned (location, storage class, versioning), which is genuinely useful. However, it says nothing about required permissions, error behavior for non-existent buckets, or other operational traits expected of an unaided getter.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the verb and resource come first and the parenthetical examples add useful detail without padding.

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?

For a simple one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers purpose and sample return fields. It stops short of covering failure modes or permission requirements, which is a minor gap given the tool's low complexity.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented (bucket name without gs:// prefix). The description only echoes 'for a bucket' and adds no naming, format, or validation meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (fetches) and resource (bucket metadata), and enumerates the metadata kinds returned (location, storage class, versioning). It is clearly distinguishable from gcs_list_buckets and gcs_create_bucket/gcs_delete_bucket by verb, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb: an agent can infer 'use this when you need one bucket's metadata.' There is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites, and no routing to related getters like gcs_get_object_metadata or gcs_list_buckets.

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