Plausible MCP Server and API by Cotlet

Add annotation in Plausible

plausible_add_annotation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Add annotation in the user's own Plausible account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Plausible step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Plausible Cloud Browser. Plausible's official API: Plausible has an official API, but a limited one (checked 22 Oct 2026).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "plausible_add_annotation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations: it returns screens, buttons, and fields step by step, and it 'opens nothing by itself.' This prevents the agent from mistaking it for a mutation tool.

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 core message is front-loaded: add annotation guidance, then use browser tools. However, the final sentence about Plausible's official API is redundant ('Plausible's official API: Plausible has an official API...') and adds limited value. The overall description is understandable but could be tightened.

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 zero-parameter guidance tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: it returns step-by-step instructions and does not execute the action. It tells the agent what to do next (use cotlet_browser_* tools). Minor details about the exact instruction format are omitted but not critical.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to explain beyond the empty schema, and the description appropriately does not invent parameters.

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 states a specific action: it will guide the agent through adding an annotation in the user's Plausible account. It also clarifies that the tool returns step-by-step instructions and does not perform the action itself, which distinguishes it from the cotlet_browser_* execution tools. The wording is slightly indirect because 'Add annotation' could initially imply a write operation, but the following sentences correct that.

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?

It explains the usage flow: get the step-by-step instructions here, then perform the steps with cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Plausible Cloud Browser. It also notes that Plausible's official API is limited, implying why browser guidance is needed. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the routing to browser tools is clear.

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

All Plausible MCP Server and API by Cotlet 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?