Skip to main content
Glama

past.dev

by dev.past
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Chart requests over time

request_histogram
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calls per time bucket over a range for one project, split by how they ended: accepted, accepted then failed later, and rejected. The bucket follows the range as on the screen, so a range never draws more than about a hundred buckets. Takes the same filters and search as list_requests. Mirrors the Requests screen's histogram; needs project Read on the project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd of the range, ISO 8601. Defaults to now.
fromNoStart of the range, ISO 8601. Defaults to 24 hours before `to`, the screen's default range.
searchNoMatches a request id, a key name or a data point id.
projectNoThe project's slug, exactly as get_viewer or list_projects returned it. May be omitted when the organization has one live project.
keyNamesNoAPI key names to keep.
statusesNoExact status codes to keep, for example [401].
endpointsNoEndpoints to keep, as routed, for example "/api/v1/ingest".
statusClassesNoStatus classes to keep: "2xx", "4xx", "5xx".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / endpoints / items / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / endpoints / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / keyNames / items / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / keyNames / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / project / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / search / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / statusClasses / items / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / statusClasses / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / statuses / type
      Previous value: -"array"New value: +[
+  "array",
+  "null"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds real context beyond them: the bucket-count cap ('never draws more than about a hundred buckets'), the meaning of the three outcome categories, and the required 'project Read' permission. Return format details are not given, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core behavior and free of filler; the bucket-cap and auth sentences both earn their place. Slightly dense in the opening sentence but well structured overall.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains what the chart conveys (calls split by outcome per bucket) and the auth requirement, which is enough to invoke it correctly. It stops short of describing the exact response payload shape, a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so each of the 8 parameters is already documented with format, defaults, and examples. The description adds no per-parameter syntax or semantics beyond pointing at list_requests for the shared filter set, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (calls per time bucket over a range) and immediately distinguishes itself from list_requests by describing aggregation and the accepted/late-failed/rejected split. An agent can tell this is a charting/aggregation tool rather than a row-listing tool without opening the schema.

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?

'Takes the same filters and search as list_requests' ties it to the sibling so the agent knows the filter surface is shared, and 'Mirrors the Requests screen's histogram' signals the visualization use case. No explicit when-not guidance, but the context is clear enough to route correctly.

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

All past.dev toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources