sponsor_stats
Get statistics for a sponsor: number of YouTubers, median subscribers, operations per week/month/year
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Sponsor ID |
mcp
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes a read-only operation ('Get statistics'), but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, or side effects. It is adequate but not revealing.
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?
The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and outputs. No unnecessary words or repetition.
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?
Given the tool has one parameter and no output schema, the description explicitly lists the key statistics returned (YouTubers count, median subscribers, operations per time periods). This is fully adequate for an agent to understand the tool's output.
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% with one parameter (id) described as 'Sponsor ID'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'sponsor', and lists specific statistics (number of YouTubers, median subscribers, operations per week/month/year). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sponsor_get and sponsor_mostActive.
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 description implies usage for retrieving statistics, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sponsor_get or sponsor_mostActive. No exclusions or context are given.
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.
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Tools are cleanly divided into sponsor_ and youtuber_ groups with distinct purposes. Each tool targets a specific operation (search, get, stats, similar, etc.) without functional overlap.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent pattern: either sponsor_<action> or youtuber_<action>, with import_status as a single utility following the same underscore_lowercase convention.
Tool Count5/5
17 tools cover the domain thoroughly—search, detail, stats, similarity, recent content, bulk import—without feeling bloated or sparse.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface provides comprehensive read and import operations for sponsors and YouTubers, including search, stats, similarity, and progress tracking. No obvious gaps for the intended analytics use case.