Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

usage_timeseries

Retrieve the signed-in user's request usage as UTC time buckets for charts, with optional filters for range, bucket size, and endpoint.

Instructions

Get current user's usage timeseries. Returns the signed-in user's request usage as UTC time buckets for charts. range is period (default), day, week, month or custom (with RFC3339 from and to); bucket is hour or day; endpoint filters to one endpoint such as google/search. Each bucket has start, end, requests, charged_requests, credits and overage. Empty buckets are filled with zeros.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoCustom upper bound in RFC3339 format when range=custom
fromNoCustom lower bound in RFC3339 format when range=custom
rangeNoTime range preset. Defaults to the current billing period.
bucketNoBucket size. Defaults to hour for day range and day otherwise.
endpointNoOptional endpoint filter

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / bucket / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "hour",
+  "day"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / range / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "period",
+  "day",
+  "week",
+  "month",
+  "custom"
+]
  2. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does useful work: it discloses UTC bucketing, the per-bucket fields (requests, charged_requests, credits, overage) and the zero-fill behavior for empty buckets. It omits auth/permission requirements and any rate or bucket-count limits, which is why it stops short of 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then parameters, then return shape — a logical progression. It is dense but every clause carries information, and the response-field enumeration is justified because no output schema exists.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description rightly covers return contents and the zero-fill edge case, and it fully maps the five optional parameters. Only the absence of auth/limit context and sibling routing keeps it from being complete.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value: it spells out the range presets with 'period' as default, ties custom to RFC3339 from/to, gives the bucket default rule, and provides a concrete endpoint example ('google/search'). That is meaningful enrichment beyond the schema text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get current user's usage timeseries') and clarifies the scope as the signed-in user's request usage bucketed by UTC time for charts. This implicitly distinguishes it from usage_overview and usage_recent_ips, but it never names or contrasts those siblings explicitly.

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 phrase 'for charts' implies the intended use case, and the parameter walkthrough hints at how to shape output, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or any comparison against the sibling usage_* tools (usage_overview, usage_endpoints, usage_recent_ips). Usage is left to inference.

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