platform stats
platform_statsLive platform numbers: members, apps testing, open tester slots, verified tester-days.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
platform_statsLive platform numbers: members, apps testing, open tester slots, verified tester-days.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the numbers are 'live' (i.e., refreshed/real-time rather than cached) and it enumerates the returned fields, which matters because there is no output schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence listing the metric set with no filler. Every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming the four metric groups. A one-clause note on freshness or scope would make it fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. No misleading parameter hints are given.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific resource (live platform numbers) and enumerates exactly which metrics are returned, which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like about, pricing, or my_account. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with the overlapping 'about' tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to call this versus 'about', 'pricing', or 'my_account', all of which could plausibly surface platform-level information. Usage is only implied by the noun 'platform numbers'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.