Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
USTC BB MCP

USTC BB MCP

by quantai1314
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

bb_list_courses

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all visible USTC Blackboard courses with their IDs, names, semesters, and source links so you can identify and select a course.

Instructions

列出全部可见课程及准确 ID、名称、学期和来源链接。

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": "bb_list_courses"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okNo
dataNo
errorNo
messageYes
completeNo
warningsNo
checked_atNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that results are restricted to 'visible' courses and lists the returned fields, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or how visibility is determined.

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 clause: the operation first, then the returned fields. No filler, nothing to trim.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not needed, and with zero parameters the schema is trivially complete. What remains slightly thin is operational context such as authentication requirements, implied by the presence of bb_login, and result ordering.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain — the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly adds no parameter noise.

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 gives a specific verb and resource — list all visible courses — and enumerates the returned fields (ID, name, semester, source link). It is clear on its own, though it never names a sibling or states how it differs from other list tools such as bb_list_course_files.

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: the phrase 'all visible courses' hints that this is the entry-point enumeration tool, but there is no explicit when-to-use rule, no prerequisite (e.g. login first), and no exclusion pointing to any alternative.

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