Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bwiki-mcp

bwiki-mcp

by putaojuju
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

bwiki_navigate

Navigate to a BWIKI page using a specified full URL or page name. Enables direct access to targeted wiki content for editing or viewing.

Instructions

导航到BWIKI页面。可以指定完整URL或页面名称。

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": "bwiki_navigate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo完整URL，如不提供则使用baseUrl
pageNameNo页面名称，如 'Main Page' 或 '文件:xxx.png'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the action and parameter options, but does not disclose whether navigation waits for page load, what happens to the current browser state, or what the return value is. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the purpose and main usage with zero wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple navigation tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with two optional parameters fully described in the schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks details about expected return values or edge cases, making it incomplete in a fuller context. It does not hinder basic use but leaves gaps.

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?

The schema descriptions cover both parameters (url and pageName) at 100%, including the fallback to baseUrl for url. The description merely paraphrases this ('can specify full URL or page name'), adding no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb+resource: 'navigate to BWIKI page.' It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by noting the two ways to specify the target (full URL or page name), which sets it apart from click, get content, and other actions.

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 by explaining how to specify the destination, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or provide any exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisite conditions or error cases, so the context is clear but incomplete.

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