token-pilot

session_analytics

Analyze session token savings to view calls, tokens saved, per-tool breakdown, top files, and cache hits. Enable verbose for per-intent details.

Instructions

Show token savings report: calls, tokens saved, per-tool breakdown, top files, cache hits. Use verbose=true for full breakdown (per-intent, decision insights, savings by category).

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": "session_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`verbose`	No	Show detailed breakdown: per-intent, savings by category, decision insights (default: false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.47.0Jun 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It clearly describes the tool as generating a read-only report with no mention of destructive actions. While it does not explicitly state it is read-only, the nature of analytics and the sibling tools imply safety.

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 sentences efficiently convey the tool's purpose and a key usage option. No wasted words; the information is front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains what the report contains (specific metrics). It does not cover pagination or limits, but for a simple reporting tool with one optional parameter, this is sufficient.

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% with a well-described boolean parameter. The description adds the same information as the schema's description, plus a usage suggestion. This provides marginal extra value, meeting the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 explicitly states the tool shows a token savings report with specific metrics (calls, tokens saved, per-tool breakdown, top files, cache hits). The verb 'show' and resource 'token savings report' are clear, and it naturally distinguishes from sibling tools focused on other aspects like budgets or snapshots.

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?

Guidance is provided for when to use verbose=true vs false, which helps the agent decide. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives for related tasks (e.g., session_budget, session_snapshot).

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