Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OVB3 Bridge

OVB3 Bridge

by vanamthrishul
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

vbcs_export_bo_data

Read-onlyIdempotent

Exports business-object data from a standalone VBCS app as CSV for a single object or as a ZIP of CSVs for all objects, from design-time or deployment databases, saved to disk or returned inline.

Instructions

Export business-object data from a standalone VBCS instance: one object as CSV (returned inline unless outputPath is given), or omit boName to export every object as a ZIP of CSVs (always saved to disk; path returned).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boNameNoBusiness object id; omit to export all objects as a ZIP
targetNo'design' (default) = design-time data; 'deployment' = staging/live database
appNameYes
appVersionYes
outputPathNoWrite the file here instead of returning CSV inline

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.3.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / boName / description
      Added value: +"Business object id; omit to export all objects as a ZIP"
    • addedInput schema / properties / outputPath
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Write the file here instead of returning CSV inline",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / target
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "'design' (default) = design-time data; 'deployment' = staging/live database",
+  "enum": [
+    "design",
+    "deployment"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "appName",
-  "appVersion",
-  "boName"
-]New value: +[
+  "appName",
+  "appVersion"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior the annotations cannot: CSV is returned inline unless outputPath is set, and the all-objects ZIP is always written to disk with the path returned, plus the design-vs-deployment data source.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence carries the verb, resource, and both modes without filler. The nested parentheticals make it dense to parse but every clause earns its place.

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?

For a 5-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical unknown — where the result lands (inline vs. disk path) — and both modes. Only the unglamorous appName/appVersion params and the target enum detail are left to the schema.

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 60%, and the description largely restates what the schema already documents for boName and outputPath rather than adding new detail. The target parameter's design/deployment semantics live only in the schema, and appName/appVersion are undocumented in both places.

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 states a specific verb (Export) and resource (business-object data) and clearly separates two operating modes: single object as CSV vs. all objects as ZIP. It is plainly distinct from the sibling vbcs_import_bo_data, but it never names that sibling to draw the contrast explicitly.

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?

It gives explicit mode-selection rules — supply boName for one object, omit it for a full ZIP export — and notes the inline-vs-disk behavior tied to outputPath. It stops short of stating when to reach for this over the import tool or any other sibling.

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