Sweeppea MCP

fetch_data_transfer

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get data transfer records for a specific sweepstakes including bytes transferred, payment status, and rates. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token.

fetch_data_transfer

When to use

Get data transfer records for a specific sweepstakes including bytes transferred, payment status, and rates. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token.

Pre-calls required

fetch_sweepstakes if the user gave you a sweepstakes name instead of a token

Parameters to validate before calling

sweepstakes_token (string, required) — The sweepstakes token to fetch data transfer records from (UUID format)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sweepstakes_token`	Yes	The sweepstakes token to fetch data transfer records from (UUID format)

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the prerequisite call and summarizing the returned data (bytes transferred, payment status, rates), going beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is well-structured with headings, but it contains redundant repetition: the first sentence is duplicated verbatim in the 'When to use' section. This wastes space, though the overall length is still short and the sectioning helps readability.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only tool with rich annotations, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, prerequisite, and expected data content. It lacks explicit mention of return format or pagination, but the tool's simplicity and the provided details make it sufficiently complete.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single required parameter (sweepstakes_token, UUID format) with 100% coverage. The description repeats the parameter's purpose and adds the prerequisite that the token should come from fetch_sweepstakes, but it does not meaningfully enrich the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action ('Get data transfer records') and clearly identifies the resource ('sweepstakes') and the data included (bytes transferred, payment status, rates). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like fetch_billing_transactions or fetch_wallet_transactions.

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?

The description explicitly explains when to use the tool and includes a required pre-call instruction: 'Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token.' It does not mention specific exclusions or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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

All Sweeppea MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (fetch_* for lists, get_* for single items, create/update/delete for writes), making them distinguishable. A few near-overlaps exist (fetch_billing_transactions vs fetch_wallet_transactions, draw_winners vs schedule_drawing) but the descriptions clarify the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun, with fetch_ for list operations and get_ for single-item retrieval. Some verb variation (add_participant, count_participants, draw_winners, schedule_drawing) deviates from the dominant create/fetch/update/delete pattern but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 83 tools, this is far beyond a well-scoped server (typically 3-15, with 25+ considered too many). Even though the platform has broad functionality, the sheer number of tools creates significant agent confusion and selection overhead.

Completeness4/5

The sweepstakes domain is thoroughly covered: lifecycle management, participants, groups, rules, drawings, winners, calendar, notes, todos, tickets, surveys, invoices, billing, files, and entry settings. A few minor gaps exist (e.g., no general participant field update, no archive action) but the surface is remarkably complete for its scope.

Resources

Need Help?