Return summary stats of how this MCP server has been used (top tools called, success rate, recent activity). Free. Use to verify your own integration is hitting the right tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, but description adequately discloses it's a read-only query returning stats, with mention of 'Free'. No hidden behavioral traits.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two succinct sentences with no redundant information, front-loaded with key purpose and use case.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Lacks output schema but describes return content (top tools, success rate, recent activity) sufficiently for a simple stats tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist; description correctly indicates zero input needed. Schema coverage is 100%.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it returns summary stats (top tools, success rate, recent activity) and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like pricing_info or wallet_helper.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides a clear use case (verify integration) and notes it's free, but doesn't specify when not to use compared to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct, but list_endpoints and pricing_info both expose endpoint and pricing details, which could cause an agent to call the wrong one. install_snippets, usage_stats, and wallet_helper have separate, well-defined purposes.
All names use lowercase snake_case, but the style is mixed: install_snippets and list_endpoints follow verb_noun, while pricing_info, usage_stats, and wallet_helper are noun-based. The naming is readable but not uniform.
Five tools is a reasonable, compact set for an onboarding and payment-helper server. However, for a server branded as 'Data Enrichment', the count reflects meta-support tooling rather than actual enrichment capabilities.
The set covers installation, endpoint discovery, pricing, usage stats, and wallet setup, but it includes no actual data-enrichment operations. Given the stated purpose, agents cannot perform the primary task through these tools.