Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
board-spec-mcp

board-spec-mcp

by roshs189
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_machine_creation_fields

Retrieve the machine creation section of a Yocto board specification from a git repo, replacing Confluence page parsing.

Instructions

Return only the machine_creation section of a board's spec.

Use this from the qcom-yocto-new-machine skill instead of parsing a Confluence page's Board Identity / Disk Configuration sections.

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": {
      "machine": "<machine>"
    },
    "name": "get_machine_creation_fields"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
machineYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, authentication, or return format. It only states the output is the machine_creation section, which is minimal.

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 two sentences: the first states the purpose concisely, and the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Despite low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description does not explain the parameter or output structure, which an agent would need to use the tool correctly. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the 'machine' parameter, and the description does not explain what the parameter means or any constraints. It adds no meaning beyond the schema field name.

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 the tool returns only the 'machine_creation' section of a board's spec, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_board_spec' which returns the full spec.

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?

The description explicitly advises to use this from the 'qcom-yocto-new-machine skill' instead of manually parsing Confluence pages, providing clear context for when to use this tool and an alternative to avoid.

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