Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bosch-flow-mcp

bosch-flow-mcp

by partymola
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

bosch_get_service_records

Retrieve the digital service book history for your Bosch eBike, listing dealer-logged service dates and completed work; filter by bike or date range. Requires an EU Data Act (EUDA) client sign-in.

Instructions

Get the digital service book history for your Bosch eBike.

Returns all service records logged by Bosch dealers and service centres, including dates and descriptions of work performed.

Service records come only from the EU Data Act API; with a standard Bosch eBike Flow sign-in this is empty and the result explains why (register a euda client).

Args: bike_id: Optional bike UUID to filter to one bike. start_date: Start date (YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-MM, or Nd). Default: all records. end_date: End date. Default: today.

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": "bosch_get_service_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bike_idNo
end_dateNo
start_dateNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "bosch_get_service_recordsOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Addedv0.2.3
  3. Removedv0.2.2
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the data source (EU Data Act API only), the prerequisite (register an euda client), and that the empty-result case is self-explaining. It omits anything about pagination, record volume, or how failures surface.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the caveat, then a compact Args block. The sentence about dates and descriptions of work performed is mild padding but also conveys return content, so nothing here is wasted.

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 read-only, zero-required-param history fetch with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, source constraint, and all parameters. What is missing is the shape and size of the returned records, which an agent may want before loading a large history.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description has to carry all parameter meaning, and it documents all three: bike_id as a UUID filter, start_date with concrete accepted formats (YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-MM, Nd) and an all-records default, end_date defaulting to today. The end_date format is left unspecified, though it is presumably the same as start_date.

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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Get the digital service book history') and the second narrows the scope to dealer/service-centre records. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like bosch_get_activities or bosch_get_batteries without opening the schema.

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?

It gives an actionable usage condition: with a standard Bosch eBike Flow sign-in the result will be empty and the response explains why, so an agent knows when this call is pointless. It does not name an alternative tool to use instead, which keeps it short of a 5.

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