NPM Sentinel MCP

npmTrends

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get download trends and popularity metrics for npm packages over selected periods to compare adoption and inform package choices.

Instructions

Get download trends and popularity metrics for packages

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": {
      "packages": "<packages>"
    },
    "name": "npmTrends"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`period`	No	Time period for trends. Options: "last-week", "last-month", "last-year"	last-month
`packages`	Yes	List of package names to get trends for
`ignoreCache`	No	Force a fresh lookup, ignoring the cache

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	No
`results`	No
`summary`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.24.0Jul 28, 2026
Removedv1.23.0Jul 25, 2026
Changed2 schema fields changedv1.20.0Jul 13, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / ignoreCache
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Force a fresh lookup, ignoring the cache",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
First observedv1.0.0Aug 14, 2025

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., caching, data freshness). 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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic what but could be more specific about the format of trends.

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?

The input schema provides full descriptions for all 3 parameters, so the description does not need to add much. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves download trends and popularity metrics for packages. It uses a specific verb and resource, and is distinct from sibling tools like npmVersions or npmSize.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or point to sibling tools for other use cases.

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