GreenlandAI

contribute_stats

Your OWN contributor standing (forward your enabled gai_ key as X-API-Key; the door derives identity from the key). Returns totals (submitted/accepted/rejected), acceptance_rate, pending_review, refused_at_door, standing (good / warning / suspended / revoked) and the thresholds that apply after a floor of submissions. Read-only. GET /api/v1/contribute/status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "title": "contribute_statsDictOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only', which covers side effects, and details the authentication via X-API-Key and that identity is derived from the key. It also lists the returned fields and thresholds. It does not mention error conditions or rate limits, but for a read-only status tool this is a minor gap.

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?

Two well-structured sentences front-load the main purpose ('Your OWN contributor standing') and then detail the return fields, auth, and endpoint. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema (though not shown, the description lists all returned fields), the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: what it returns, how to authenticate, and that it is read-only. Nothing critical is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

There are zero parameters, so the schema provides nothing. The description adds crucial context: the required X-API-Key header and the endpoint. This goes beyond the schema and is essential for invocation.

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 a specific verb ('Returns'), a specific resource ('contributor standing'), and scope ('Your OWN'), and lists the exact data returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling contribute_* tools by focusing on the caller's own status rather than submissions or receipts.

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?

The description implies when to use it ('Your OWN contributor standing', 'Read-only') and gives the endpoint, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The self-scope is a clear differentiator, yet no direct comparison to siblings like contribute_submissions or contribute_receipts is provided.

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

All GreenlandAI 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?