Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ToolRouter

by io.github.Humanleap
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Credits Usage

credits_usage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Usage summary or history. Pass scope: "me" | "team" and detail: "tool" | "skill". Sorted by cost with _others rollup.

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": "credits_usage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of top tools/skills to return. Remaining rolled into "_others". Default 10.
scopeNoWhose usage to show. "me" for personal, "team" for team-wide.
detailNoDetail level. "tool" groups by tool, "skill" adds per-skill breakdown.tool
offsetNoRecords to skip for pagination (history mode). Default 0.
periodNoTime period to summarize. 'all' covers the last 30 days (the maximum window).all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe read (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful output behavior ('sorted by cost', '_others rollup') that isn't in the schema. It stops short of describing the return shape or how the summary vs history modes differ beyond pagination.

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?

Three short sentences with no padding, and the core purpose is front-loaded. The telegraphic style ('Pass scope: "me" | "team"') is efficient though it duplicates schema enum info.

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?

For a read-only, zero-required-param tool with a fully documented schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: no clarification of the summary-vs-history distinction, no return-shape note (no output schema exists), and no sibling routing to credits_balance or invoice_list.

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 all five parameters are already documented, including all three enums and the period window. The description mostly restates the scope/detail enums already in the schema; it only adds the '_others rollup' meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 identifies the resource (usage summary/history for credits) and adds two behavioral facts ('sorted by cost', '_others rollup'). However it never distinguishes itself from the sibling credits_balance (or invoice_list), which an agent could easily pick by mistake. Clear resource, no sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It mentions 'summary or history' but never states when to use one mode vs the other, nor when to prefer this over credits_balance. The only hint at a trigger ('history mode') appears in the offset parameter, not the description. No when-to-use guidance beyond implied context.

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

All ToolRouter toolsInspect
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