Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
runmeter

runmeter

by Aptica-Solutions
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

runmeter_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the complete telemetry record for a specific run ID to inspect cost and reliability details of a single LLM or agent execution.

Instructions

Return the full stored row for a single run id.

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": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "runmeter_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
run_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the 'full stored row' detail, which provides some value beyond the schema, but it does not mention behavior for nonexistent IDs or permission requirements. 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 a single, clear sentence with zero filler. It front-loads the action immediately and wastes no 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?

The tool is simple, and the presence of an output schema covers return structure. Annotations cover the read-only and idempotent nature. For a basic get-by-ID operation, the description is sufficiently complete, though it omits error-case behavior.

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?

With only one parameter (run_id) and 0% schema description coverage, the description is expected to compensate. It mentions 'run id', which aligns with the schema title, but adds no additional semantics beyond what the parameter name itself implies. Adequate but not enhancing.

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 uses a specific verb 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource ('full stored row') and scope ('single run id'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list (multiple runs) and summary (aggregate data).

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 usage when fetching a single run's full data, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like summary or list. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools