Hostsmith

get_account

Read-only

Get the user's account: organization details (orgId, orgName), the calling user's home partition under user.homePartition, current subscription plan with its limits (max sites, max domains, storage, bandwidth), and current usage counts. Use to check how much headroom the user has before creating new sites or to confirm plan-tier features. Usage covers every partition: the site and storage counts are the organization's, and custom domains are added up from each partition.

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": {
      "llm_model": "<llm_model>"
    },
    "name": "get_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`llm_model`	Yes	The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
`conversation_id`	No	Pass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint already in annotations, it discloses non-obvious aggregation semantics: site and storage counts are organization-wide, while custom domains are summed across every partition. That is exactly the kind of subtle behavior an agent could otherwise misread as per-partition, and it is stated directly.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the returned fields before the usage guidance, and little waste. The final sentence on partition coverage is slightly dense and slows reading, but every clause carries information not available elsewhere.

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?

For a read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully compensates by naming the payload fields (`orgId`, `orgName`, `user.homePartition`, plan limits, usage counts) and explaining how those numbers are aggregated. Nothing an agent needs to interpret the result is missing.

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%, and both parameters (`llm_model`, `conversation_id`) are fully documented in the schema itself, including the 'pass unknown rather than guess' and conversation-continuity rules. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the user's account') and enumerates exactly what comes back: org details (`orgId`, `orgName`), `user.homePartition`, subscription plan limits, and usage counts. An agent can immediately distinguish this from sibling read tools like get_site or list_sites because it is account/plan-scoped rather than resource-scoped.

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?

Explicitly names the two situations that select this tool: checking headroom before creating new sites and confirming plan-tier features. It does not state when *not* to use it or point to a specific alternative, which keeps it below a 5, but the positive guidance is concrete and actionable.

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

All Hostsmith tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.