Fireshift Leak Score

Fireshift scan counts

get_stats

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns aggregate counts from scans run on fireshift.ai and through this server: total scans, distinct sites, scans in the last 7 days, the most common findings in the last 7 days with their share of scored sites, and the grade mix. Never returns domain names. Updated every 5 minutes.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the data spans both fireshift.ai scans and scans through this server, it deliberately never returns domain names (privacy constraint), and it is refreshed every 5 minutes (staleness bound). Return shape/typing is not described, but the substantive behavioral context is above average.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence delivers the purpose, the full metric list, the privacy exclusion, and the refresh cadence with no filler. Every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it does so by enumerating each metric. The minor gap is that the structural form (a single object of counts, key names, whether 'grade mix' is a map) is not specified, so an agent knows what is returned but not exactly how it is shaped.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter meaning for the description to compensate for. The description adds useful constraint information about what the returned aggregates cover (this server plus fireshift.ai), which is the only scoping semantics that exists for a parameterless tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (returns aggregate counts) and then enumerates the exact metrics: total scans, distinct sites, 7-day scan count, top findings with share of scored sites, and grade mix. Combined with the explicit exclusion ('Never returns domain names'), an agent can immediately distinguish this aggregate-stats tool from the per-site scan_site sibling.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the content ('aggregate counts', 'last 7 days'), so an agent can infer this is the summary/overview tool rather than a scanning tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, and no named alternative for drill-down into a specific site.

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

All Fireshift Leak Score tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?