Skip to main content
Glama

Get site usage

get_site_usage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the page views of a hosted site for each UTC day, oldest first, with the monthly cap of the plan if it sets one, and the page views of the current month.

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": {
      "siteId": "<siteId>"
    },
    "name": "get_site_usage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoDays to read, today included: 1-90 (default 30)
siteIdYesSite id, e.g. from list_sites

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysYes
dailyYes
siteIdYes
currentMonthYes
totalPageViewsYes
monthlyPageViewCapYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description only needs to add scope. It does add the UTC-day bucketing, oldest-first ordering, and that the monthly plan cap and current-month totals are included — useful, but these are largely return-shape facts that the output schema can already convey.

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?

A single dense sentence with no filler and the core action front-loaded. The trailing clauses about the cap and current month stack up slightly awkwardly but each carries information.

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 an output schema, rich annotations, and a fully documented two-parameter schema, the description only needs to frame what is computed and over what window — which it does. It would be stronger if it tied the days parameter to the returned daily series.

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% and the days parameter is fully documented in the schema (1-90, default 30). The description never mentions the days window at all, so the schema does all the work; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read the page views of a hosted site") plus the granularity (per UTC day) and ordering (oldest first), which separates it from metadata-oriented siblings like get_site. It never names a sibling, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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?

Analytics usage is implied by the payload described, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., published site, plan tier), and no pointer to an alternative such as get_billing for cap/credit questions. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.