@scom82/topvisor-mcp

topvisor_check_price

Preview the cost of a position check for a project without running it. Use this to estimate expenses before executing the check.

Instructions

Preview the cost of a position check without actually running it. Returns pricesByUsers.={projectsIds, price}. Use this before topvisor_check_positions to estimate cost.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "topvisor_check_price"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`project_id`	Yes	Project ID (converted to filter internally)
`regions_indexes`	No	Region indexes to check (from topvisor_list_regions)
`folders_ids`	No
`folders_ids_depth`	No
`groups_ids`	No
`do_snapshots`	No	1 = also collect SERP snapshots
`apply_discount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the non-mutating nature ('preview... without actually running it') and the return format (pricesByUsers). Missing details like auth or rate limits, but acceptable for a simple cost check.

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: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance and return structure. No redundancy, 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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but could benefit from more parameter guidance or example response. It references another tool for regions, which helps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only 43% of parameters have schema descriptions, and the tool description adds little beyond schemas. It references regions_indexes as coming from topvisor_list_regions, but no extra semantics for other parameters.

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 it previews cost without running the check, and distinguishes from sibling topvisor_check_positions by saying 'use this before'.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use (before topvisor_check_positions to estimate cost). It does not list when not to use or alternative cost tools, but the context is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server