Skip to main content
Glama

Codestats

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Recent

recent
Read-onlyIdempotent

Code::Stats (codestats.net) — the XP one Code::Stats user has earned in roughly the last 12 hours, broken out by programming language and by machine, alongside their lifetime profile totals. Answers how much a Code::Stats user has coded today and in which languages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userNo
recent_activityNoRecent coding activity from last ~12 hours

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "username": "johndoe"
+  },
+  {
+    "username": "alice_dev"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "recent_activity": {
+      "description": "Recent coding activity from last ~12 hours",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "language": {
+            "description": "Programming language used",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "timestamp": {
+            "description": "ISO timestamp of the activity",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "xp": {
+            "description": "XP earned in this activity",
+            "type": "integer"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "user": {
+      "properties": {
+        "total_xp": {
+          "description": "Total XP earned across all languages",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "username": {
+          "description": "Username of the Code::Stats user",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context (time window, breakdown by language/machine, lifetime totals) not captured in annotations, but does not detail response format or edge cases.

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?

The description is a single sentence that packs in context and value, but the opening fragment 'Code::Stats (codestats.net) —' is slightly clunky. It is concise and mostly front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, time window, breakdown dimensions, and lifetime context. The output schema exists, so return value details need not be explained. Missing: no mention of what happens for invalid usernames or whether data updates in real-time, but overall it's sufficiently complete for a simple one-param read-only 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the username as a Code::Stats user but does not specify format, case sensitivity, or behavior for non-existent users. With only one required param and clear context, it barely meets the baseline; schema does minimal work.

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 a specific verb ('Answers how much... coded today') with a unique resource ('Code::Stats user') and scope ('roughly the last 12 hours'), while also distinguishing from siblings like recent_changes by focusing on XP earned and language/machine breakdown. It is specific enough to stand alone.

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?

The description implies when to use it (when you want to know a user's recent coding activity in the last 12 hours), but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools include recent_changes and user, which could be conflated, yet no comparison is provided.

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

All Codestats toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct, well-described purposes, but clusters like ask_pipeworx/ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded and the five polymarket_* tools have overlapping scopes that could cause misselection. The beta currently behaves identically to the stable router, and `recent` vs `recent_changes` vs `recent_alerts` are confusingly similar names for different domains.

Naming Consistency2/5

All names use lowercase underscores, but there is no consistent verb_noun pattern: some are verbs (ask, compare, generate), some are nouns (entity_profile, recent, user), and some are adjectives (deep_research). There are coherent subfamilies (subscribe/unsubscribe/list_subscriptions, remember/recall/forget), but the overall naming is a mix of conventions.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well above the 25+ threshold, making the surface heavy and hard to navigate. Many are highly specialized meta-tools (e.g., five Polymarket analyzers) that could be consolidated.

Completeness2/5

For a server named 'Codestats', only `recent` and `user` address coding stats, leaving major gaps in what that name implies. The broader data/research/betting capabilities are fairly rich, but the server's stated identity is under-served and there's no clear lifecycle coverage for any single domain.

Resources