Pineprompt

List Source Analytics Tool

list-source-analytics-tool

Read-onlyIdempotent

Per-source aggregates: the percentage of analyzed responses in the window that cited each domain, and the average number of citations from each domain per analyzed response. Paginated.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "list-source-analytics-tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	1-indexed page number. Defaults to 1.
`tags`	No	Tag IDs (prompt classifiers) to limit responses by. Optional.
`sort_by`	No	Sort key. One of: used_percentage, average_citations. Defaults to used_percentage.
`end_date`	Yes	Inclusive UTC end of the analytics window. Must be on or after `start_date` and on or before today.
`interval`	No	Bucket granularity for time-series tools. One of: day, week, month, year. Required for time-series tools, ignored for aggregate tools.
`monitors`	No	Monitor IDs in the active project. Optional.
`per_page`	No	Page size, 1-100. Defaults to 25.
`sort_dir`	No	asc or desc. Defaults to desc.
`countries`	No	ISO-3166-1 alpha-2 country codes to include. Optional.
`platforms`	No	AI platforms to include. Optional. Values: chatgpt, perplexity, gemini, grok, copilot, claude, google_ai_mode, google_ai_overview.
`project_id`	Yes	Project to compute analytics for.
`start_date`	Yes	Inclusive UTC start of the analytics window. ISO 8601 date (YYYY-MM-DD).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that results are paginated and defines what the two aggregate figures mean, which is real context beyond the annotations. It stops there, saying nothing about default page size, page-count limits, or behavior when the window contains no data.

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?

Two short sentences with the metric definitions front-loaded and the pagination note trailing. No filler, no restatement of the title, and every clause carries information.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description correctly compensates by defining the two returned fields, which is the most important thing an agent needs. It is slightly thin on filter scope (tags, monitors, countries, platforms) and on what the window semantics mean for aggregation, but the core is covered.

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 100%, so all 12 parameters including page, per_page, sort_by, and interval are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, such as noting that interval is ignored for this aggregate tool or how sort_by interacts with the two reported metrics. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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 names the exact output: percentage of analyzed responses citing each domain plus average citations per response, aggregated per source. That is a specific verb-and-resource statement an agent can match to a need. It does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as list-source-url-analytics-tool or get-source-usage-time-series-tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., the time-series or URL-level siblings), and no prerequisites or exclusions. The only usage-adjacent signal is the word 'Paginated,' which describes mechanics rather than selection criteria.

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

All Pineprompt tools Inspect

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

Need Help?