Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Cloud Counter

CloudCounter
Read-only

Cloud Counter: Cloud Counter stores and updates persistent numeric counters by ID without needing a database. It tracks increments, decrements, and custom values while returning timestamps and number properties like parity and prime status. (Cost: 1 credit)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "CloudCounter"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe ID of the counter (e.g., test_counter)
valueNoThe value to increment the counter by. The resulting counter value must stay within 100000000.
actionNoThe action to perform

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description explicitly claims the tool 'stores and updates persistent numeric counters' and 'tracks increments, decrements', which is mutating behavior, while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. That is a direct conflict for a stateful write operation. The useful extra details (timestamps, parity/prime, 1 credit cost) cannot offset an incorrect safety signal.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and free of filler. The repeated tool name and the trailing cost parenthetical are minor inefficiencies rather than real bloat.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so the return details are optional context, and the parameters are schema-documented. However, the vague 'action' parameter is left unexplained and the mutating nature of the tool is not reconciled with its read-only annotation, leaving a gap an agent needs closed before invoking it.

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%, so id, value, and action are already documented in structured form. The description mentions increments, decrements, and custom values but never maps these to the 'action' parameter or explains what 'list' (the schema example) does, so it adds little beyond the schema.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('stores and updates persistent numeric counters by ID') and distinguishes the tool from database-backed alternatives. The only drag is the redundant 'Cloud Counter: Cloud Counter' lead-in, which restates the name instead of adding scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative among the many sibling tools. The phrase 'without needing a database' hints at a use case but never states conditions for selecting this tool over, say, a local state store or a math/increment utility.

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

All APIVerve 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