USTC BB MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

bb_download_courseware

Idempotent

Download the latest courseware files by keyword from a USTC Blackboard course to your local machine, returning the actual file paths. Undated files are ordered last.

Instructions

按文件名关键词下载最新 N 个课件到本机；无日期文件排最后，返回实际路径。

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": {
      "course": "<course>"
    },
    "name": "bb_download_courseware"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`course`	Yes
`latest`	No
`keyword`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`data`	No
`error`	No
`message`	Yes
`complete`	No
`warnings`	No
`checked_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish openWorldHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description goes beyond them by disclosing that files land on the local machine (a real side effect), that undated files sort last, and that actual paths are returned. It omits overwrite behavior on filename collisions and any auth or permission requirements, so it stops short of a 5.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and scope, then adds the ordering rule and return value. No filler whatsoever.

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 3-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations present, the description covers side effects, sorting, and returns adequately. The missing piece is 'course' resolution, plus behavior on overwriting existing local files.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does cover 'keyword' ('按文件名关键词') and 'latest' ('最新 N 个'). However, the required 'course' parameter is never explained (identifier format, name vs. ID), which is the single most important gap for correct invocation.

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 names a precise verb (下载/download), a precise resource (课件/courseware), and the scope ('最新 N 个' + '按文件名关键词'), plus the destination ('到本机'). This lets an agent distinguish it from the listing sibling bb_list_course_files without reading either schema.

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 its use case (fetch the newest N courseware files matching a keyword), but it names no alternative tool and gives no when-not-to-use guidance, such as when to list files first or how it relates to bb_list_course_files.

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

Deploy Server