Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-1c-local-bridge

mcp-1c-local-bridge

by ntappw
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

usages

Find where a 1C metadata object is used in the open session by querying the metadata index for related fields, registers, documents, event subscriptions, scheduled jobs, and subsystems.

Instructions

Где используется объект метаданных, по индексу сеанса: поля и объекты его типа (в том числе через определяемые типы), документы, которые пишут в регистр, движения документа, подписки на события, журналы, последовательности, планы обмена, подсистемы, функциональные опции, общие реквизиты, подчинённые справочники, ввод на основании; для общего модуля - подписки и регламентные задания, вызывающие его методы. Обращений из кода модулей в индексе нет.

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": "usages"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesПолное имя объекта метаданных: Справочник.Контрагенты, РегистрНакопления.ТоварыНаСкладах, ОпределяемыйТип.Владелец, ОбщийМодуль.ОбщегоНазначения. СправочникСсылка.X тоже подойдёт.
limitNoСколько строк связей показать.
refreshNotrue - построить индекс метаданных заново, не беря сохранённый: после загрузки изменений конфигурации в базу, если индекс их не заметил.
sessionNoСеанс моста: идентификатор из sessions или часть строки соединения, имени конфигурации, пользователя. Не указан - единственный открытый сеанс.
timeoutNoСколько секунд ждать индекс. Построение на большой конфигурации идёт дольше - тогда вызов сообщит об этом, а повторный вызов дождётся той же команды.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.4.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that results come from the session index and that module-code references are absent, which are important behavioral limits. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, index rebuild side effects, or other operational characteristics beyond what the schema already documents.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core meaning and then lists relevant usage categories compactly. It is a single dense sentence, but nearly all content is relevant. Minor improvement could come from list formatting, but it is not bloated.

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?

The tool has an output schema and full schema description coverage, so return values and parameter details do not need to be repeated. The description covers the main scope, index-based nature, and a key limitation. It could be more complete with explicit read-only/rebuild behavior and alternative-tool guidance.

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%, so all five parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds context about the index and the absence of code-module references, but it does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific purpose: finding where a metadata object is used by the session index. It enumerates the relation types returned, including common-module special handling, making the tool's scope clear. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools such as find, query, or metadata, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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 implied by the purpose, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives. The limitation 'Обращений из кода модулей в индексе нет' is useful negative guidance, and the refresh parameter description gives a refresh scenario, but alternative tools are not named.

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