Skip to main content
Glama

Meta Council

by com.meta-council
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Meta Council Platform Metrics

get_meta_council_platform_metrics
Read-onlyIdempotent

OPERATOR ONLY: cross-owner analytics for the META COUNCIL PLATFORM itself — every account added together, NOT the caller's workspace (use get_workspace_metrics for that). Requires both the platform:admin scope AND an ADMIN_EMAILS operator account; everyone else gets a permission error. Returns content-free aggregates only: account counts, 30-day active owners, session counts by status and token totals, ticket open/done, deal pipeline and outstanding invoice amounts separated by recorded currency without FX conversion and with missing coverage stated, overdue invoice counts, feedback backlog, per-pillar adoption, the busiest panel slugs, and a per-account activity table (email and counts). It never returns query text, answers, feedback bodies, deal or invoice detail, or any other text a user typed — the aggregate reports how much, never what about. Note that open + done need not equal the ticket total: cancelled tickets are neither.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "text": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "text"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, but the description adds substantial context: operator-only scope, auth requirements, that it returns aggregates only, that it never returns user-typed content, and the open+done vs total ticket caveat, and currency handling without FX conversion. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded with the most important scoping and routing caveat, followed by auth, return content, and exclusions. Each sentence contributes, though the long enumerations could be formatted more readably; it is efficient enough for an agent to trust.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool, the description gives complete context: scope, auth prerequisites, the sibling alternative, the exact categories of returned aggregates, and explicit non-returned data and caveats. With no output schema, no required parameters, and annotations already covering side effects, nothing essential to invoking it correctly is omitted.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4 for a zero-parameter tool; there are no parameter semantics to document. The description instead clarifies response semantics, which is appropriate; nothing is missing.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('cross-owner analytics for the META COUNCIL PLATFORM itself' with every account added together) and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling get_workspace_metrics. It is unmistakable what this tool does and what scope it operates over.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Usage guidance is explicit and actionable: it says to use get_workspace_metrics when the caller's workspace is the target, and it states the required auth persona (platform:admin plus ADMIN_EMAILS operator) so an agent knows when it may apply. It also states the failure mode for unauthorized callers, leaving no ambiguity about eligibility.

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

All Meta Council 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