Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Basecamp MCP Server

Basecamp MCP Server

by stefanoverna
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Basecamp Documents

basecamp_list_documents
Read-onlyIdempotent

List documents from a Basecamp vault, with optional title filtering using regular expressions.

Instructions

List documents in a vault.

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": {
      "vault_id": "<vault_id>"
    },
    "name": "basecamp_list_documents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoOptional regular expression to filter documents by title
vault_idYesVault ID containing the documents

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / bucket_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Project/bucket ID",
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "bucket_id",
-  "vault_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "vault_id"
+]
  2. Addedv1.0.3

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds no further behavioral details, but also does not contradict annotations.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple list tool.

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?

The tool is simple and annotations cover safety, but the description lacks information about return format, pagination, or behavior when no filter is provided. It is adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'documents in a vault'. It distinguishes from siblings like basecamp_create_document and basecamp_get_document, which involve different actions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like basecamp_get_document or other list tools. No context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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