Skip to main content
Glama

getCounter

Destructive

Fetches a stored integer counter by id, optionally incrementing it with hit or setting it to a given value. Using a new id creates a new counter.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "getCounter"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID to specify the counter. Use a new id to create a new counter.
hitNoWhether to increase the count by 1. If used, must be set to true.
valueNoSet the count to a specific integer value. Setting the value to 0 resets the counter.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already flag readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description doesn't contradict them. It adds useful context beyond the annotations (a new id creates a counter, value=0 resets), but overlaps heavily with what the params already document and doesn't clarify side effects like persistence or failure modes.

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 tightly packed sentences with the fetch behavior front-loaded and no redundant filler. Every clause 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 no output schema, the description could note return shape, but for a simple 3-param tool with full schema coverage and annotations, what's given is mostly sufficient. The counterintuitive 'get'-named tool that also writes is reasonably 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 the schema already explains `id`, `hit`, and `value` in detail. The description's paraphrase adds almost no new semantic detail beyond the schema's own text.

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 ('Fetches a stored integer counter by `id`') plus the mutation options, so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. No sibling tools are counter-related, so sibling differentiation is moot, but the purpose 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?

The mention that `hit` increments and `value` sets implies when each parameter applies, and that a new id creates a counter, but there are no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use statements or alternatives named. Adequate but largely inferred.

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.

Resources