corpusAI Cloud Pricing

Azure eviction rates

azure_eviction

Read-onlyIdempotent

Paid (0.01 USDC per call). Azure spot eviction-rate history (28-day buckets, sampled daily). Daily samples of the eviction-rate bucket Azure reports per SKU (0-5, 5-10, 10-15, 15-20, 20+ percent over the trailing 28 days). Collected daily since 2026-09-05; there is no history before the first sample.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Last sample date (inclusive), YYYY-MM-DD. Default: latest.
`sku`	No	Optional SKU name (for example `D2s_v5`). Default: every SKU.
`from`	No	First sample date (inclusive), YYYY-MM-DD. Default: earliest.
`region`	Yes	Azure region slug: `us-east`, `us-west-2` or `eu-west`.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`region`	No
`samples`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "region": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "samples": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "bucket": {
+            "description": "Eviction-rate bucket in percent over the trailing 28 days: `0-5`, `5-10`, `10-15`, `15-20`, `20+`.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "date": {
+            "description": "Sample day.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "sku": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only/idempotent profile, so the description earns credit for adding non-structured traits: per-call cost, sampling cadence, 28-day bucket granularity, and the fact that no history exists before the first sample. These are real behavioral facts an agent needs but cannot read off the annotations.

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?

Content is front-loaded with the cost notice, then the data definition, then granularity and history bounds. Sentences are dense and largely waste-free, though the bucket enumeration is a long aside that slightly thickens already-complete prose.

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 an output schema present and rich annotations covering the safety profile, the description needn't explain return structure, and it supplies the remaining context (cost, cadence, data-window limits). It is complete enough to call correctly; only cross-sibling routing is absent.

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 100% (region, sku, from, to all documented with defaults), so the schema carries parameter meaning and a 3 is the baseline. The description explains bucket ranges, but those describe output values rather than adding syntax or constraints for the four input 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 resource and payload precisely: 'Azure spot eviction-rate history' with 28-day buckets sampled daily. An agent immediately knows what data comes back, though it never names or contrasts any sibling (e.g., spot_daily, spot_history) to disambiguate within a large tool family.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: you'd call it to inspect Azure eviction history by region/SKU, and it flags the cost (0.01 USDC) and the collection start date as a hard boundary. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative guidance, and no exclusions against neighboring tools.

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

All corpusAI Cloud Pricing 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.