Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nas.com

by com.nas
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Lead Form Analytics

get_lead_form_analytics
Read-only

Get analytics for a lead form managed by the authenticated Nas.com user. Before offering this action or requesting its inputs, check business permissions. FREE businesses cannot use this tool, regardless of individual feature rows. Call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs. Show any grace-period warning and verified resubscribe link before continuing, and never proceed when access is blocked.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "communityId": "<communityId>",
      "formId": "<formId>"
    },
    "name": "get_lead_form_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formIdYesLead form ID, from a Nas.com lead form listing.
endDateNoEnd of the reporting window (ISO 8601 date).
lastXDaysNo
startDateNoStart of the reporting window (ISO 8601 date).
communityIdYesNas.com business (community) ID. Use an ID returned by list_businesses or another Nas.com tool; never invent one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / communityId / description
      Added value: +"Nas.com business (community) ID. Use an ID returned by list_businesses or another Nas.com tool; never invent one."
    • addedInput schema / properties / endDate / description
      Added value: +"End of the reporting window (ISO 8601 date)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / formId / description
      Added value: +"Lead form ID, from a Nas.com lead form listing."
    • addedInput schema / properties / startDate / description
      Added value: +"Start of the reporting window (ISO 8601 date)."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantial non-structured context: a hard paywall for FREE businesses, a mandatory pre-check tool call, and handling of grace-period warnings and resubscribe links. It does not describe the shape of the returned analytics, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded correctly in the first sentence, but the permission gate is restated three times across the remaining sentences ('check business permissions', 'Call check_business_tool_access', 'never proceed when access is blocked'), which is redundant for a definition this short.

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?

The access-control prerequisites are unusually thorough, which is the main complexity here, and readOnly annotations cover the safety dimension. However, with no output schema and an unexplained lastXDays parameter that can conflict with startDate/endDate, an agent still lacks guidance on how to build a valid reporting window or interpret the results.

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 description coverage is 80%, so the schema already explains communityId, formId, startDate and endDate. The description adds nothing about parameters, and lastXDays remains unexplained in both places, as does any interaction between lastXDays and the explicit date range; 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: analytics for a lead form owned by the authenticated Nas.com user. The 'lead form' scoping distinguishes it reasonably from the business/community analytics siblings, though no sibling is named as an alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives explicit when-not conditions: FREE businesses cannot use it regardless of feature rows, and the caller must stop when access is blocked. It also prescribes a prerequisite workflow (check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs). What it lacks is routing to an alternative for callers that fail the gate.

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

All Nas.com 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