Get AskAIs usage rules
get_usage_rulesRead pricing, free-credit, privacy, and acceptable-use rules before creating an account or receipt.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
AskAIs AI Receipt Generator
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a read-only operation (non-destructive) but lacks details on data freshness, authentication needs, or any potential side effects. The behavior is straightforward, so a score of 3 is appropriate.
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 a single sentence of 14 words, front-loading the action 'Read'. Every word is essential, and no redundant information is present.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no parameters, no output schema, and simple read behavior, the description fully covers the necessary context: what the tool does and when to use it. No additional information is required for an AI to select and invoke this tool correctly.
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 has zero parameters with 100% schema coverage, so baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying the content of the rules (pricing, free-credit, privacy, acceptable-use), compensating for the lack of parameters.
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 the action 'Read' and the resource 'pricing, free-credit, privacy, and acceptable-use rules'. It distinguishes itself from siblings (create_free_account, generate_receipt, get_balance) by specifying the purpose of reading rules before other actions.
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 advises using this tool 'before creating an account or receipt', providing clear context. It does not mention alternatives directly, but the sibling tools are distinct in function, making the usage context unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: account creation, receipt generation, balance checking, and rules reading. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: create_free_account, generate_receipt, get_balance, get_usage_rules.
Tool Count5/5
With 4 tools, the set is appropriately scoped for a receipt generation service, covering account management, generation, balance, and rules.
Completeness4/5
The core workflow is covered (account, generation, balance, rules), but missing features like viewing past receipts or deleting accounts are minor gaps.