get_pricingCurrent storage-tier pricing, monthly usage credits, and billing cycle. Storage-only pricing: no per-query or egress fees.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, idempotent true, and destructiveHint false, which sufficiently convey safety. The description adds value by specifying the exact nature of the retrieved data, reinforcing that this is a read-only lookup.
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?
The description is concise, using only two sentences to convey the purpose and key details. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no unnecessary words or repetition.
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 the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what data will be returned. It mentions storage-tier pricing, monthly credits, billing cycle, and exclusions, covering all necessary information for a user to decide to invoke it.
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 input schema is empty with no parameters, so no parameter explanations are needed. The description confirms the tool requires no input, making the parameter semantics fully clear.
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?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves current pricing, specifying storage-tier pricing, monthly usage credits, and billing cycle. It also clarifies what is not included (per-query or egress fees), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.
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?
The description implicitly indicates when to use the tool (to obtain current pricing details) and provides useful context about the scope of the returned data. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the purpose is obvious enough that a user would not confuse it with the other listed tools.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: search, read, API reference, quickstart, formats, benchmarks. The main overlap is between compare_storage_tiers and get_pricing, which both cover storage-tier pricing and could confuse an agent.
The set mostly follows a predictable get_/list_/read_/search_ verb pattern with snake_case throughout. Minor deviation: read_doc and search_docs use navigation verbs instead of get_/list_, but the pattern remains readable.
Eight tools is well-scoped for a documentation-focused server. Each tool covers a meaningful documentation need without redundancy or bloat.
The surface covers the full documentation workflow: searching docs, reading docs, quickstart, API operations, pricing, storage tiers, formats, and benchmarks. No obvious dead ends or missing core operations.