Plausible MCP Server and API by Cotlet

List sites in Plausible

plausible_list_sites

Read-onlyIdempotent

List sites 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_list_sites"
  }
}

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?

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds the non-obvious trait that it 'opens nothing by itself' and only returns screens/buttons/fields instructions, which prevents an agent from assuming side effects or a data payload. Auth, rate limits, and exact return shape are not described.

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 operational content is front-loaded and useful, but the closing sentence ('Plausible's official API: Plausible has an official API, but a limited one (checked 22 Oct 2026)') is redundantly phrased and never explains why the API limitation matters here. That clause could be cut or made purposeful.

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, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (step-by-step UI instructions) and what the agent must do next. It stops short of describing the structure or length of those instructions, a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 baseline applies and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter guidance is needed or missing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List sites in the user's own Plausible account') and immediately clarifies the actual output is step-by-step guidance rather than data. That clarification resolves the tension with the tool name, though an agent skimming the name could still expect a site list.

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?

Gives a clear workflow: call this first, then act using the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Plausible Cloud Browser. It does not state when to prefer this over plausible_get_site_stats or other sibling plausible_* tools, so exclusions are absent.

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?