Hustlin

Report a conversion

report_conversion

Report a signup, activation or purchase that happened in the founder's own product, with the visitor's tracking code so the channel that brought them gets the credit. This is the back half of attribution: without it every channel reads zero customers. For the founder's app to report on its own, use conversion_snippet. Owner only.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "productId": "<productId>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "report_conversion"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	Yes	signup: a new account. activation: the user did the thing the product is for. purchase: a payment (give valueCents).
`userRef`	No	Opaque reference to the converting user in the founder's system (never an email).
`currency`	No	ISO currency code, default usd.
`clickCode`	No	The tracking code the visitor arrived with (the hlc query parameter on the landing URL). This is what credits a channel.
`productId`	Yes	The product id.
`externalId`	No	Idempotency key from the founder's system, e.g. '<user id>:signup' or the Stripe invoice id. Repeats are deduplicated, so retries are safe.
`occurredAt`	No	When it happened, ISO-8601. Default now. Must be within the last 400 days.
`valueCents`	No	Purchase value in cents.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write nature is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the 'Owner only' authorization requirement and the consequence of omission ('without it every channel reads zero customers'). It does not discuss return values or error behavior, but with annotations carrying the safety profile a 4 is warranted.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the attribution rationale and the alternative tool. No filler or repetition of schema content.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, the alternative path, and the authorization constraint, while the schema fully documents parameters including idempotency and date bounds. Only the response shape is unaddressed, which is a minor gap.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds conceptual meaning by explaining that the visitor's tracking code is what credits a channel, which clarifies the role of clickCode beyond its schema text. It does not add syntax detail for the other parameters, so it stops short of a 5.

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 (report) and resource (a signup, activation or purchase) plus the required tracking code, and explicitly frames it as 'the back half of attribution'. It is clearly distinguishable from conversion_snippet, which is named as the automated alternative.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use context (reporting conversions from the founder's own product) and routes the agent to the sibling conversion_snippet when the app should report on its own. It also states the 'Owner only' access constraint, leaving little to inference.

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

All Hustlin 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.