upTake

Project data

uptake_data

Read-onlyIdempotent

One slice of project data, when the overview is not enough. Slices: channels_90d (visits, signups, revenue and number of posts per source over 90 days); posts_30d (posts of the last 30 days with the visits, signups and revenue each brought); releases_30d (shipped releases and merged changes of the last 30 days (ids usable in uptake_write_post), with their drafts); revenue_by_day_30d (revenue and number of payments per day over 30 days); moments (communication moments: upcoming (ids usable in uptake_write_post), done and skipped); reports_4w (summaries of the last 4 weekly reports and their moves); mentions_7d (what people said about the product in the last 7 days); scheduled_7d (posts scheduled for the next 7 days); time_by_channel_30d (time the maker spent per network over 30 days); google_search_28d (Google Search clicks, impressions and top queries over 28 days); places_28d (results per named place (subreddit, newsletter issue) over 28 days); pages_30d (landing pages over 30 days: sessions that entered the site on each page, signups of those visitors and their signup rate (small_sample under 50 sessions)).

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": {
      "slice": "<slice>"
    },
    "name": "uptake_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slice`	Yes	Which data to read.
`project`	No	Which project: its id or site (example.com) from uptake_projects. Optional when the maker has a single project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / slice / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "channels_90d",
-  "posts_30d",
-  "releases_30d",
-  "revenue_by_day_30d",
-  "moments",
-  "reports_4w",
-  "mentions_7d",
-  "scheduled_7d",
-  "time_by_channel_30d",
-  "google_search_28d",
-  "places_28d"
-]New value: +[
+  "channels_90d",
+  "posts_30d",
+  "releases_30d",
+  "revenue_by_day_30d",
+  "moments",
+  "reports_4w",
+  "mentions_7d",
+  "scheduled_7d",
+  "time_by_channel_30d",
+  "google_search_28d",
+  "places_28d",
+  "pages_30d"
+]

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses output shape per slice, a small-sample caveat ('small_sample under 50 sessions'), and cross-tool linkage ('ids usable in uptake_write_post'). Pagination or result-size behavior is not mentioned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, and each clause corresponds to a distinct slice, so little is wasted. However, the twelve semicolon-separated clauses form an unbroken wall of text that is hard to scan when an agent needs to compare slices quickly.

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?

For a twelve-way dispatch tool with no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden well by naming the fields each slice returns. It leaves minor gaps around result volume, ordering, and whether slices can be combined.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the enum is self-documenting, so the baseline would be 3. The description exceeds that by explaining the payload of every enum value and by clarifying that the project identifier comes 'from uptake_projects' and is optional for single-project makers.

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 states a concrete verb and resource ('one slice of project data') and immediately enumerates what each slice returns, so an agent knows exactly what the tool yields. It also differentiates from the sibling uptake_overview by framing this as the drill-down ('when the overview is not enough').

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?

There is an explicit selection condition relative to uptake_overview, and the slice list functions as guidance for picking the right variant. It does not state exclusions (e.g., when to prefer uptake_posts or uptake_get_post for single-post detail), so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All upTake tools Inspect

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

Need Help?