Skip to main content
Glama

ScanBIM MCP

by io.scanbimlabs

acc_project_summary

Fetch a single ACC/BIM 360 project's full attributes (name, type, dates, address, hub) from the APS Data Management project endpoint. If hub_id is omitted, the first hub the app can see is used. When to use: you need name, type, or scope details for a single project before acting on it, or to confirm the project still exists. When NOT to use: you want the list of all projects — call acc_list_projects. You want issues/RFIs counts — call the list tools. 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 or hub_id not found — check the IDs; 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
hub_idNoOptional ACC hub_id (format 'b.<account-uuid>'). If omitted, the worker picks the first hub returned by /project/v1/hubs.
project_idYesFull ACC project_id including the 'b.' prefix, exactly as returned by acc_list_projects. Unlike the Issues/RFIs tools, this tool passes the ID through unchanged to the Data Management project endpoint.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / hub_id / description
      Added value: +"Optional ACC hub_id (format 'b.<account-uuid>'). If omitted, the worker picks the first hub returned by /project/v1/hubs."
    • addedInput schema / properties / hub_id / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "b.11111111-2222-3333-4444-555555555555"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Added value: +"Full ACC project_id including the 'b.' prefix, exactly as returned by acc_list_projects. Unlike the Issues/RFIs tools, this tool passes the ID through unchanged to the Data Management project endpoint."
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "b.a4be0c34a-4a01-4b0e-9f1a-123456789abc"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: READ-ONLY, idempotent, writes to D1 usage_log, plus APS scopes, rate limits, and detailed error handling by HTTP code. This goes beyond typical descriptions and completely covers the safety and side-effect profile.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by clear usage guidance, and then supporting details (scopes, limits, errors, side effects). Each sentence serves a distinct function, and the use of headers and bullets makes it easy to scan.

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 single-project fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use/avoid, parameter semantics (via schema), side effects, error handling, and rate limits. The implied return attributes (name, type, dates, address, hub) are explicitly listed, making the tool fully comprehensible.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage of both parameters, including the default behavior for omitted hub_id and the requirement to pass project_id unchanged. The description adds little beyond restating these facts, so the 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('single ACC/BIM 360 project's full attributes') and explicitly names the APS Data Management project endpoint. It differentiates from siblings by specifying 'single project' and naming alternative tools for list operations.

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?

The description includes explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, naming acc_list_projects for listing projects and the list tools for issues/RFIs counts. This provides clear decision guidance for selecting between 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