Crank Protocol

get_usage_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

An agent's own premium-feature spend report (FREE read).

Returns per-feature {calls, spend_usd, cost_usd} plus totals from the FeatureUsage ledger. period: today | 7d | 30d | all (default 30d).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "wallet_address": "<wallet_address>"
    },
    "name": "get_usage_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`period`	No	30d
`caller_id`	No
`wallet_address`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it returns per-feature and totals and mentions the data source (FeatureUsage ledger), providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is an output schema, the description need not detail return values. It explains the type of data and period, but fails to explain the required wallet_address and optional caller_id parameters. For a tool with 3 parameters and no schema descriptions, this leaves gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the period parameter and its values, but does not explain the required wallet_address or optional caller_id. This partial coverage justifies a baseline of 3.

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?

The description clearly states it's a spend report for premium features, specifying it returns per-feature and total costs. It distinguishes itself from other 'get_*' tools by focusing on the agent's own usage and spend.

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?

The description explicitly states it's a 'FREE read' and explains the period parameter with supported values. However, it does not compare directly with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, which would improve it further.

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

All Crank Protocol 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?