Skip to main content
Glama

Crawlora MCP

usage_overview

Read-only

Fetch the authenticated principal's current usage summary data and recent request and credit totals. Use usage_endpoints for route-level breakdown or usage_timeseries for temporal trends.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "usage_overview"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoCustom upper bound (RFC3339) when range=custom.
fromNoCustom lower bound (RFC3339) when range=custom.
rangeNoTime range preset: period, day, week, month, or custom. Defaults to the current billing period.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the data is scoped to the authenticated principal and 'current', which is modest added context, but says nothing about freshness, caching, or completeness of the totals.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the sibling routing. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With an output schema covering return values and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. The main gap is not addressing the remaining usage_* siblings, but for a read-only summary tool this is minor.

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 coverage is 100%, so range/from/to semantics are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter guidance beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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 (Fetch) plus the resource (the authenticated principal's usage summary, request and credit totals), and names the two siblings it is not. An agent can distinguish it from usage_endpoints and usage_timeseries without opening any schema.

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 routes to alternatives: usage_endpoints for route-level breakdown, usage_timeseries for temporal trends. It gives clear context for choosing this tool, but omits the other usage siblings (usage_recent_ips, usage_platform_adjacency), which could still cause ambiguity.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources