Get analytics snapshots for a post, an account, or a run. scope must be post, account, or run; id is the matching identifier.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| scope | Yes | ||
| window | No | Optional analytics window, e.g. 7d. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' and clarifies the scope/id relationship, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, describe return format, or clarify the meaning of 'snapshot' (e.g., cached vs. live data).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with no filler. The main action and required constraints are front-loaded, making the purpose immediately clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple analytics getter, the description plus schema are sufficient. The schema documents the optional 'window' parameter, and the description covers the two required parameters. No output schema exists, but the return value is implicitly analytics data; a bit more detail about the 'snapshot' nature could improve completeness, but it is not critical.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that 'scope' must be one of post/account/run and that 'id' is the matching identifier for that scope. This is valuable given the schema only describes 'window' and leaves 'id' and 'scope' without descriptions (33% schema coverage).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('analytics snapshots'), and specifies three distinct scopes (post, account, run). It differentiates itself from sibling tools like get_post or run_status by focusing on analytics rather than raw resource retrieval.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only outlines required parameters (scope, id) but does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or comparison with sibling tools like workspace_usage or run_status.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few are close: delete_instagram_comment vs hide_instagram_comment overlap (though one is preferred), and get_analytics overlaps with Instagram-specific analytics tools. Overall, the boundaries are generally clear, with only minor potential confusion.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_accounts, connect_account, upload_asset, cancel_post). There are no deviations in style or grammar, making the naming highly predictable.
With 31 tools, this exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. While the broad multi-provider social media domain justifies some breadth, the sheer number makes the surface heavy and potentially overwhelming, pushing the score down.
The tool set covers core workflows well: account connection, scheduling/publishing, post management, analytics, Instagram-specific engagement (comments, messages), asset upload, and workspace health/usage. Minor gaps include no explicit disconnect_account or delete_post, but these are edge cases; the domain is largely covered.
