Skip to main content
Glama

Usage by key and endpoint

usage_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calls and points spent, broken down by key and endpoint, over the last 1-31 days: use when the user asks where their points went.

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": "usage_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoWindow in days, 1-31 (default 7)
key_idNoOnly this key

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive call, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the aggregation shape (broken down by key and endpoint) and the 1-31 day window bound, which is genuinely beyond the annotations. It does not disclose whether the aggregation is summed or time-bucketed, whether zero-usage keys appear, or latency/cost characteristics for a 31-day scan.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence: measures first, breakdown second, window third, trigger last. No filler, no restated title, and the purpose is readable in one pass.

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 only two fully documented parameters, no output schema, and annotations carrying the read-only profile, the description gives enough to call the tool correctly. The main residual gap is the omission of return-field or bucketing expectations, which is minor for a small read-only summary tool.

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%, with both 'days' and 'key_id' fully documented, so the baseline applies. The description restates the 1-31 day range and the per-key breakdown but adds no syntax, default, or formatting detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Names the concrete measures (calls and points spent), the resource (usage), and the aggregation dimensions (key and endpoint) over a bounded window. An agent can distinguish this from pricing_get or get_account without opening a schema, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger condition: 'use when the user asks where their points went.' That is a real routing cue rather than an implied one. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or naming an alternative tool for account-level or pricing questions.

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.