Skip to main content
Glama

Sweeppea MCP

by com.sweeppea.mcp

get_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the current account's plan and usage telemetry. Returns the AUTHORITATIVE plan limits AND real-time usage so you can warn the user when they are approaching a cap. Key fields: plan.Name (plan name to mention to the user), plan.Settings.MaxSweepstakesAllowed (single cap on TOTAL sweepstakes — there is NO separate active vs total limit, the API treats them as one count), plan.Settings.MaxParticipantsAllowed, plan.Settings.MaxStorageSize (GB), plan.Settings.MaxApiCallsAllowed, plan.Settings.SubscriptionPrice; telemetry.DataConsumed (GB used now), telemetry.APICalls (calls used this period). Each account can have a custom plan — these values OVERRIDE any default numbers mentioned in other tool descriptions or instructions. Call this once per session before creating/cloning sweepstakes, before quoting limits or usage to the user, or when the user asks about pricing, billing, or feature availability.

get_plan

When to call

BEFORE: creating/cloning a sweepstakes, quoting limits or usage to the user, suggesting an upgrade, or answering questions about pricing, billing, or which features are enabled.

ONCE per session — cache the result mentally; the response rarely changes mid-session.

Why authoritative

plan.Settings.MaxSweepstakesAllowed is a SINGLE per-account cap. The API does NOT distinguish "active" from "total" — there is only one count.

Different accounts can have very different plans (admin, enterprise, default). Always trust the values returned by this tool over any number mentioned elsewhere in tool descriptions or instructions.

Reading the response

  • plan.Name — say this name to the user when discussing limits (e.g. "your plan 'X' allows...")

  • plan.Settings.MaxSweepstakesAllowed — total sweepstakes cap

  • plan.Settings.MaxParticipantsAllowed — total participants in the account

  • plan.Settings.MaxStorageSize — GB

  • plan.Settings.MaxApiCallsAllowed — API call quota

  • plan.Settings.PaidModule* (15 booleans) — which features are enabled vs gated

  • telemetry.DataConsumed — GB used now (compare against MaxStorageSize)

  • telemetry.APICalls — calls used this period (compare against MaxApiCallsAllowed)

If usage is >= 80% of any cap, warn the user proactively.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses that plan settings override defaults, that there's no separate active vs total cap, and that plans can be custom. It also explains how to interpret the response, including the warning at 80%, adding valuable behavioral context the annotations do not provide.

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 front-loaded with a clear summary and organized into sections with bullet points. However, it is verbose and somewhat redundant (e.g., 'AUTHORITATIVE' repeated, and the reading-response section restates fields already introduced). Still, the structure aids comprehension.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully compensates by detailing every relevant field, including booleans for paid modules and telemetry comparisons. It covers when-to-call, interpretation, and edge cases (single cap, overrides), making it complete for an agent to use 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 takes zero parameters, so the schema trivially covers 100%. The baseline of 4 for no parameters applies; the description focuses on return values rather than input semantics, which is appropriate and adds value through field-level explanations.

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 opens with a clear action verb 'Get' and specific resource 'current account's plan and usage telemetry.' It distinguishes itself by labeling the data as 'AUTHORITATIVE' and listing key fields, making it distinct from billing or profile tools among siblings.

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?

It explicitly states when to call ('before creating/cloning sweepstakes, before quoting limits or usage'), when to cache ('once per session'), and provides a proactive warning threshold. It also clarifies to trust this over other sources, giving strong decision context.

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

All Sweeppea MCP toolsInspect
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