VHGENGINE

by app.railway.up.engine-production-3bdc

list_billing_events

Read-only

Recent billing events (usage.recorded, credits.granted, credits.low). Free.

    Newest first, paged with limit/offset like list_hooks and list_outcomes. Returns
    {events:[{id, event_type, payload, created_at}], limit, offset, total}.
    Errors: unauthorized, invalid_request, rate_limited.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max billing events to return, 1-200. Above the ceiling is an invalid_request, never a silent truncation.
`offset`	No	Number of rows to skip for paging, 0-9223372036854775807. Page with offset += the limit you actually requested; `total` in the response is the unpaged count. The ceiling is SQLite's largest bindable integer: above it the read could only ever have been a 500, so it is a typed invalid_request instead.
`api_key`	No	API key for this call. Omit to fall back to the Authorization: Bearer / X-API-Key request header (streamable-HTTP only), then the VHGENGINE_API_KEY env var (the stdio default). No key resolvable -> unauthorized.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Page size actually applied.
`total`	No	Rows matching the filters IGNORING paging.
`events`	No	This page: {id, event_type, payload, created_at}.
`offset`	No	Offset this page started at.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavior: newest-first ordering, paging via limit/offset, response shape ({events, limit, offset, total}), and error types (unauthorized, invalid_request, rate_limited). This significantly exceeds the annotation and schema information.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and cost, then paging, response format, and errors. No redundancy or unnecessary detail. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and detailed parameter schemas, the description still provides response shape and error conditions, making it complete for invocation. It doesn't cover every possible behavior, but for a simple list endpoint it is sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains limit, offset, and api_key thoroughly. The description only adds that limit/offset are used for paging, which is marginal. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the resource (billing events) and the action ('Recent billing events'), enumerates specific event types (usage.recorded, credits.granted, credits.low), and differentiates from siblings by focusing on billing events only. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear context: it's a paged list with limit/offset like list_hooks and list_outcomes, and notes it's free. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or direct users to alternative tools for other event types, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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

All VHGENGINE tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, e.g., signup vs. delete_account, create_key vs. revoke_key, generate_hooks vs. score_hook. Even similar tools like generate_hooks and generate_hooks_batch are clearly differentiated by single vs. batch operation.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 32 tools use a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., add_credits, create_checkout, revoke_key, list_outcomes) with no mixing of camelCase or other conventions.

Tool Count4/5

32 tools is slightly above the typical 15-tool range, but the domain is broad (account, keys, webhooks, generation, scoring, jobs, outcomes), and each tool has a specific purpose. No tools seem redundant.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers most lifecycle operations: CRUD for accounts/keys/webhooks, generation/scoring with batch and async variants, outcomes reporting, and auxiliary tools. Missing explicit delete for hooks (expire automatically) and some update operations, but no critical gaps.

Resources

Need Help?