Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
USTC BB MCP

USTC BB MCP

by quantai1314
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

bb_login

Idempotent

Authenticates to USTC Blackboard using locally configured credentials or environment variables, enabling course, assignment, announcement, and courseware access without sharing passwords in chat.

Instructions

自动登录中科大 BB。凭据由本机 configure 或环境变量提供，不接受聊天中的密码。

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_login"
  }
}

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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (openWorldHint=true, non-read-only, idempotent), the description discloses where credentials come from (local `configure` or environment variables) and explicitly forbids in-chat password supply, which is exactly the kind of context the annotations cannot carry. It stops short of describing session/token lifetime or what happens when credentials are missing.

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?

Two short sentences: the action first, then the credential constraint. Every clause carries information an agent needs, with no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema covering return values, the description only needs to establish the action and the auth prerequisite, both of which it does. A note on whether the session persists across later calls would close the last gap.

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 nothing for the description to disambiguate; the credential-source sentence usefully explains why no parameters exist. Baseline for a 0-parameter schema.

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?

"自动登录中科大 BB" names a specific verb (login) and resource (USTC Blackboard) plus a behavioral mode (automatic). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling tools, which are all data-retrieval operations, though the description never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the session-establishment step needed before fetching courses/assignments. There is one explicit constraint (do not pass passwords through chat) but no explicit "call this first" sequencing or when-not guidance.

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