Skip to main content
Glama
simplypixi

BugBug MCP Server

by simplypixi

get_test

Retrieve detailed information about a specific BugBug test using its unique identifier to access execution status, results, and related data.

Instructions

Get details of a specific BugBug test

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
testIdYesTest UUID

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the core logic of the 'get_test' tool. It calls bugbugClient.getTest(testId), processes the response, formats it as structured text content, and handles errors.
    handler: async ({ testId }) => {
        try {
    
          const response = await bugbugClient.getTest(testId);
          
          if (response.status !== 200) {
            return {  
              content: [
                {
                  type: 'text',
                  text: `Error: ${response.status} ${response.statusText}`,
                },
              ],
            };
          }
    
          const test = response.data;
          
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: 'text',
                text: `**Test Details:**\n\n- **Name:** ${test.name}\n- **ID:** ${test.id}\n- **Is Active:** ${test.isActive ? 'Yes' : 'No'}\n- **Is Recording:** ${test.isRecording ? 'Yes' : 'No'}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: 'text',
                text: `Error fetching test: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error'}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
  • Input schema for the 'get_test' tool using Zod, validating testId as a required string.
    inputSchema: z.object({
      testId: z.string().describe('Test UUID'),
    }).shape,
  • Registers the 'get_test' tool (imported via testsTools) to the MCP server by name, using its schema, description, and handler.
    export function registerAllTools(server: McpServer): void {
      const tools: Record<string, Tool> = {
        ...configTools,
        ...testsTools,
        ...testRunsTools,
        ...suitesTools,
        ...suiteRunsTools,
        ...profilesTools,
        ...advancedTools,
      };
    
      for (const t in tools) {
        server.registerTool(
          tools[t].name,
          {
            description: tools[t].description,
            inputSchema: tools[t].inputSchema,
            annotations: { title: tools[t].title },
          },
          (args: unknown) => tools[t].handler(args as unknown)
        );
      }
    }
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide a title that matches the description, but no behavioral hints (e.g., readOnlyHint, destructiveHint). The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action, such as authentication needs, rate limits, or return format. With no annotations, the description carries the burden but offers minimal behavioral insight.

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, direct sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on usage context, behavioral traits, or output, leaving gaps for an AI agent to infer.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'testId' documented as 'Test UUID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'details of a specific BugBug test', making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_tests' (plural) by specifying a single test, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other single-test tools like 'get_test_run'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_test_run' or 'get_tests'. The description implies usage for retrieving details of a specific test, but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/simplypixi/bugbug-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server