Skip to main content
Glama
PROMPTEYE-SP-Z-O-O

prompteye-mcp

Official
by PROMPTEYE-SP-Z-O-O
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Read the active project

get_active_project
Read-only

Identify the project that all other tools currently report on. Call this when unsure which project the metrics in a conversation refer to.

Instructions

The project every other tool is currently reporting on. Call this when unsure which project the numbers in this conversation refer to.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameYes
brandYes
labelYesGrouping label. null = the project has none.
domainYes
countryYes
createdAtYesWhen the project was created, ISO 8601 in UTC.
accessRoleYesOWNER manages the project, FULL_ACCESS edits it, READ_ONLY reads it.
alternativeDomainsYes
alternativeBrandNamesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.22
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "accessRole": {
+      "description": "OWNER manages the project, FULL_ACCESS edits it, READ_ONLY reads it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "alternativeBrandNames": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "alternativeDomains": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "brand": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "country": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "createdAt": {
+      "description": "When the project was created, ISO 8601 in UTC.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "label": {
+      "description": "Grouping label. null = the project has none.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "name",
+    "brand",
+    "domain",
+    "country",
+    "label",
+    "alternativeBrandNames",
+    "alternativeDomains",
+    "accessRole",
+    "createdAt"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the returned value is conversation-level state shared by all other tools, not a parameterized lookup, which explains why it takes no arguments.

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 short sentences, zero waste, with the identity of the resource front-loaded and the usage trigger second. Nothing is redundant with the title.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Output schema exists so return shape need not be explained, annotations cover the safety profile, and the description supplies the one non-obvious fact an agent needs: that this is the ambient project context for the rest of the session.

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?

Zero parameters, so per the baseline there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Schema coverage is 100% and no parameter documentation is needed.

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?

States a specific resource (the active project) and its scope: it is the project every other tool reports on. This distinguishes it from list_projects (enumerate) and select_project (mutate the selection), which an agent can tell apart without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly gives the trigger condition: call when unsure which project the conversation's numbers refer to. It does not mention select_project as the alternative for changing that project, so the when-not side is left implicit, but the positive guidance is clear.

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