Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

fivebar

by ar.fiveb
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Site engagement

get_site_engagement
Read-onlyIdempotent

How a site's pages were read over a range, as the dashboard's Engagement section has it, one reading a pageview, beside the period before. The answer's caveats are the rules that apply to its figures, such as some figures being counted only from a later day: read them before reporting any figure, and pass on those that change what it means. Name the site, range and filters as for get_site_summary. time_on_page is how long pages were on screen: median_seconds, which a tab left open moves least and is the one to report, average_seconds, and the readings in each of six bands. scroll_depth is how far down they were read: average_percent; read_to_end, the readings that reached 90% of the page, and scrolled, those that scrolled at all, each with its share, a fraction of 1; first_screen_percent, where the first window ended for the middle reading; and depths, the readings in each tenth. previous is the period before's, and change how far each moved, times as whole percentages and the rest in points. For each page's own, break get_site_breakdown down by time_on_page or scroll_depth; for bounce rate and visit duration, use get_site_summary. Reading is counted by page, so a goal, entry or exit filter rules it out, answered with available: false, why and what to try.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoWith from: the last day, as YYYY-MM-DD, not after today.
daysNoThe last this many days, ending today unless ending says yesterday.
fromNoWith to: the first day, as YYYY-MM-DD.
rangeNoA preset, as get_site_summary's range says what each covers.
domainYesA domain from list_sites, or any public site's.
endingNoWith days: the last day, today by default.
filtersNoEach narrows every figure to what has exactly that value, case and all, so google is not Google; all must hold.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / range / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "today",
-  "yesterday",
-  "this-week",
-  "this-week-sun",
-  "last-7-days",
-  "last-week",
-  "last-week-sun",
-  "last-14-days",
-  "this-month",
-  "last-30-days",
-  "last-month",
-  "all-time"
-]New value: +[
+  "today",
+  "yesterday",
+  "this-week",
+  "this-week-fri",
+  "this-week-sat",
+  "this-week-sun",
+  "last-7-days",
+  "last-week",
+  "last-week-fri",
+  "last-week-sat",
+  "last-week-sun",
+  "last-14-days",
+  "this-month",
+  "last-30-days",
+  "last-month",
+  "all-time"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly annotation, it discloses non-obvious behavior: caveats that change what a figure means, some figures counted only from a later day, and the failure mode for excluded filter dimensions returning available: false. It also warns to read caveats before reporting and to pass on caveats that change interpretation — real operational guidance not in the annotations.

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?

Purpose and the reporting caveat are front-loaded, and the return-field definitions earn their place given there is no output schema. The metric definitions are dense and syntactically convoluted (e.g. 'read_to_end ... and scrolled, those that scrolled at all, each with its share'), which costs scannability.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly: it defines median/average seconds, six bands, scroll depth fields, first_screen_percent, and how previous/change are expressed (whole percentages vs points). Edge cases, caveats, and fallback behavior are all covered.

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 params are already documented; the description only adds 'name the site, range and filters as for get_site_summary', deferring detail. It contributes no syntax or value guidance beyond the schema, fitting the baseline-3 case.

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 resource (site page engagement: time on page and scroll depth) over a range, and distinguishes itself from siblings by naming get_site_summary for bounce rate/visit duration and get_site_breakdown for per-page breakdowns. An agent can tell exactly what this returns versus its neighbors without opening a schema.

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?

Explicit routing: 'for bounce rate and visit duration, use get_site_summary' and 'for each page's own, break get_site_breakdown down by time_on_page or scroll_depth'. It also states the disqualifying condition — a goal, entry or exit filter rules reading out — and what happens instead (available: false, why, what to try).

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

All fivebar toolsInspect
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