Skip to main content
Glama

List calculated metrics

list_calculated_metrics
Read-only

List calculated metrics for the account (custom KPI formulas).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoOne row per calculated metric — id, name, the formula tokens it is built from, and the symbol it renders as. Pass the id as a metric when adding a calculated-metric widget.
metaNoPagination for the list — page, limit and the total row count.
successYesTrue when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "data": {
      +      "description": "One row per calculated metric — id, name, the formula tokens it is built from, and the symbol it renders as. Pass the id as a metric when adding a calculated-metric widget.",
      +      "items": {},
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "meta": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "Pagination for the list — page, limit and the total row count.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "limit": {
      +          "description": "Maximum rows per page.",
      +          "type": "number"
      +        },
      +        "page": {
      +          "description": "Zero-based index of the page returned.",
      +          "type": "number"
      +        },
      +        "total": {
      +          "description": "Total rows matching the query across all pages.",
      +          "type": "number"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "success": {
      +      "description": "True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "success"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the account-level scope but does not elaborate on behavior such as pagination, ordering, or whether archived metrics are included. This is acceptable for a simple list operation but adds only modest behavioral context 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with a brief clarifying parenthetical. Every word earns its place and there is no redundancy with the title or annotations.

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 no-parameter, read-only list operation with an output schema available, the description is complete. It identifies the resource, scope (account), and semantic meaning (custom KPI formulas). Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The schema is complete at 100% coverage with an empty properties object. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter clarification is needed.

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 ('List') and resource ('calculated metrics'), and adds a clarifying parenthetical ('custom KPI formulas'). It clearly distinguishes this retrieval tool from related metric tools like create_calculated_metric, update_calculated_metric, and archive_calculated_metric.

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 the obvious use case: retrieve account-level calculated metric definitions. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus related list/create/update metric tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and resource phrasing.

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.

Resources