Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
patchwork-os

patchwork-os

by Oolab-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

getPerformanceReport

Read-only

Retrieve a live performance assessment with per-tool latency percentiles, throughput, extension health, session counts, and overall health score.

Instructions

Live performance assessment: per-tool latency percentiles, throughput, extension health, session counts, and overall health score.

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": "getPerformanceReport"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
windowMinutesNoLookback window in minutes for throughput stats. Default: 60.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds limited behavioral context. The term 'live' implies real-time data but does not clarify caching or latency. No contradictions 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?

A single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the purpose and lists key components. No extraneous words; efficient and front-loaded.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple tool with one optional parameter and read-only annotations. However, it lacks details about the output format or structure, which are not provided by output schema.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter (windowMinutes), and its description in the schema is clear. The tool description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

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?

The description clearly specifies the resource (per-tool performance) and lists specific metrics (latency, throughput, etc.), distinguishing it from siblings like getAnalyticsReport. However, the verb 'assessment' is less direct than alternatives like 'get' or 'fetch'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without contextual boundaries.

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