Skip to main content
Glama

pinbridge

by io.pinbridge
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get account analytics

get_account_analytics
Read-onlyIdempotent

Pinterest performance metrics for a whole connected account over a date range.

    Use for account-level reporting (all pins, not only ones published
    through PinBridge). For one pin use get_pin_analytics; for publish
    headroom use get_rate_meter.

    Returns account_id, start_date, end_date, provider_mode, totals,
    daily rows (empty with include_daily=false; pass that when the totals
    are enough), and source (stored or live) with data_as_of for stored
    reads. Fails with not_found for an unknown account and with
    token_expired / scope_missing when the Pinterest connection needs a
    reconnect.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sourceNoWhere to read from. auto (default): PinBridge's nightly stored history when it covers the range, else Pinterest. stored: history only (up to 366 days). live: always ask Pinterest (up to 90 days, counts against the read limit).
metricsNoComma-separated Pinterest metric types, e.g. IMPRESSION,SAVE,PIN_CLICK,OUTBOUND_CLICK. Default: the organic engagement set.
end_dateNoInclusive end, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: today. Up to 366 days from stored history, 90 days when read live from Pinterest.
account_idYesUUID of a connected Pinterest account, from list_pinterest_accounts.
start_dateNoInclusive start, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: 30 days ago.
include_dailyNofalse: return only the range totals, with an empty daily list. Use it when the totals are all you need, e.g. over 90 days. Default: true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_daily
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "false: return only the range totals, with an empty daily list. Use it when the totals are all you need, e.g. over 90 days. Default: true.",
+  "title": "Include Daily"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / end_date / description
      Previous value: -"Inclusive end, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: today. Ranges are capped at 90 days."New value: +"Inclusive end, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: today. Up to 366 days from stored history, 90 days when read live from Pinterest."
    • addedInput schema / properties / source
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "auto",
+        "stored",
+        "live"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Where to read from. auto (default): PinBridge's nightly stored history when it covers the range, else Pinterest. stored: history only (up to 366 days). live: always ask Pinterest (up to 90 days, counts against the read limit).",
+  "title": "Source"
+}
  3. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / account_id / description
      Added value: +"UUID of a connected Pinterest account, from list_pinterest_accounts."
    • addedInput schema / properties / end_date / description
      Added value: +"Inclusive end, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: today. Ranges are capped at 90 days."
    • addedInput schema / properties / metrics / description
      Added value: +"Comma-separated Pinterest metric types, e.g. IMPRESSION,SAVE,PIN_CLICK,OUTBOUND_CLICK. Default: the organic engagement set."
    • addedInput schema / properties / start_date / description
      Added value: +"Inclusive start, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: 30 days ago."
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description consistently describes a read operation. It adds meaningful behavioral detail: return fields, the effect of include_daily, the stored/live source behavior with data_as_of, and failure modes like not_found, token_expired, and scope_missing. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: it front-loads the purpose, gives routing guidance, summarizes return shape, and lists key error cases. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler or redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and daily-row behavior. It also covers error conditions and clarifies the stored vs live source semantics. For a read-only analytics tool with rich parameter schema, this is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 each parameter already has detailed descriptions including defaults, formats, and behavior. The description adds only slight reinforcement around include_daily and source, but does not provide substantial meaning beyond the schema. 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: 'Pinterest performance metrics for a whole connected account over a date range.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying account-level reporting over all pins and explicitly naming get_pin_analytics and get_rate_meter as different tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use this tool ('Use for account-level reporting'), what it covers ('all pins, not only ones published through PinBridge'), and when to use alternatives ('For one pin use get_pin_analytics; for publish headroom use get_rate_meter'). This leaves no ambiguity about selection.

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

All pinbridge toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources