Skip to main content
Glama

ScanBIM MCP

by io.scanbimlabs

acc_list_issues

List up to 50 issues from an ACC project, optionally filtered by status and priority. Returns a normalized array of {id, title, status, priority, due_date}. When to use: you need a dashboard view of open issues, to find a specific issue by metadata, or to check the status of previously created issues. When NOT to use: you want the full audit trail of a single issue — the ACC Issues UI or the per-issue endpoint is better. This tool caps at 50 results and does no pagination. APS scopes: data:read account:read Rate limits: APS default ~50 req/min per app per endpoint; Model Derivative translation jobs ~60 req/min; OSS uploads size-limited per file to 100MB for direct upload, larger via resumable. Errors: 401 APS token expired/invalid — refresh; 403 scope or resource permission denied; 404 project_id not found — check the ID; 429 rate limited — backoff and retry; 5xx APS upstream outage — retry with jitter. Side effects: READ-ONLY. Inserts a row into D1 usage_log. Idempotent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoFilter by ACC issue status. Accepted values: 'open', 'closed', 'in_review', 'draft'. Omit for all statuses.
priorityNoFilter by priority: 'critical' | 'high' | 'medium' | 'low'. Omit for all priorities.
project_idYesACC project ID in 'b.<uuid>' or '<uuid>' form (the 'b.' prefix is stripped automatically). Obtainable via acc_list_projects.
assigned_toNoReserved for future filtering by assignee user ID or email. Currently not forwarded to the ACC API.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / assigned_to / description
      Added value: +"Reserved for future filtering by assignee user ID or email. Currently not forwarded to the ACC API."
    • addedInput schema / properties / assigned_to / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "jdoe@contractor.com"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / priority / description
      Added value: +"Filter by priority: 'critical' | 'high' | 'medium' | 'low'. Omit for all priorities."
    • addedInput schema / properties / priority / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "high"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Added value: +"ACC project ID in 'b.<uuid>' or '<uuid>' form (the 'b.' prefix is stripped automatically). Obtainable via acc_list_projects."
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "b.a4be0c34a-4a01-4b0e-9f1a-123456789abc"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"open, closed, in_review, draft"New value: +"Filter by ACC issue status. Accepted values: 'open', 'closed', 'in_review', 'draft'. Omit for all statuses."
    • addedInput schema / properties / status / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "open"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers: READ-ONLY, idempotent, side effect of inserting into D1 usage_log, error codes with remediation, rate limits, and APS scopes. It also discloses that 'assigned_to' is currently not forwarded to the API. This is exemplary transparency.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections and front-loaded purpose, but includes extraneous details like Model Derivative and OSS upload rate limits that are not relevant to listing issues. While useful for the broader APS context, these noise elements prevent a perfect score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only list tool with a rich schema and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the return shape, the 50-item cap, the 'assigned_to' caveat, error handling, and usage contexts. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides; it repeats the status/priority filters but does not explain accepted values or formats beyond the schema. The schema, however, fully documents all four parameters, so no deduction is necessary.

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 starts with a specific verb ('List'), resource ('issues'), and scope ('up to 50 issues from an ACC project'), and clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like acc_create_issue and acc_list_rfis. It also states the return format ('normalized array of {id, title, status, priority, due_date}').

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections provide clear guidance, including the key limitation (caps at 50 results, no pagination) and an alternative (per-issue endpoint or ACC Issues UI). This fully addresses when to use this tool vs. alternatives.

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

All ScanBIM MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by domain with clear prefixes (acc_, xr_, get_) and each has a distinct purpose. The only potential confusion is between lumion_render and twinmotion_render, but descriptions clarify the aesthetic difference. Overall, tools are clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow consistent patterns: acc_* for ACC operations, get_* for metadata retrieval, and xr_launch_*/xr_list_* for XR sessions. Minor deviations like list_models instead of get_models and render tools using software names as prefixes are readable and do not hinder pattern recognition.

Tool Count4/5

At 19 tools, the count is slightly above the ideal range but justified by the server's broad scope covering ACC, model translation, clash detection, rendering, and XR. Some render tools are stubs and could be trimmed, but they are clearly marked as roadmap items.

Completeness3/5

The set covers upload→translate→view→clash-detect→create issues/RFIs workflows well, but lacks update/delete operations for issues and RFIs, and there is no full-detail retrieval for a single issue or RFI. These gaps can cause workflow dead ends for closeout and status changes.

Resources