Havoptic AI Release Intelligence

Release cadence stats

cadence_stats

Read-onlyIdempotent

How fast tools ship: release counts over 7/30/90 days, average days between releases, and last release — for selected tools or all of them. Legacy input tool (single id) still works.

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": "cadence_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tool`	No	Legacy: one tool id (use tools instead)
`tools`	No	Tool ids (fuzzy: 'claude', 'codex', 'copilot' resolve). Omit for all tools; see list_tools.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`object`	Yes
`omitted`	No
`cadences`	Yes
`truncated`	Yes
`next_cursor`	Yes
`freshness_note`	No
`estimated_tokens`	No
`dataset_updated_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the legacy-compatibility note and the aggregation window, with nothing about cost, result shape, or how tools with no releases are handled.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the value proposition and the metric list, plus a short legacy clause. No filler and nothing buried.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the description covers what is computed, the default scope, and backward compatibility. The only missing piece is disambiguation from the several sibling release tools.

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 both parameters are documented including fuzzy resolution and the 20-item cap. The description restates the 'selected vs all' choice but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

It names the exact metrics returned — release counts over 7/30/90 days, average days between releases, last release — and the scope (selected tools or all). That is far more specific than the sibling names release_history or latest_releases, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

'For selected tools or all of them' and the legacy-input note give some invocation context, and the schema points to list_tools for ids. However, there is no guidance on when to choose this over release_history, get_latest_releases, or compare_tools, which is the main ambiguity an agent faces here.

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

All Havoptic AI Release Intelligence tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?