Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Podyx MCP

Podyx MCP

by Studio-Red-Barcelona
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

podyx_v1_reports_capacity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze studio capacity by room, weekday, or hour using metrics, date ranges, filters, sorting, and pagination; read-only reporting helps identify underuse and utilization.

Instructions

Analyze studio capacity GET /api/v1/reports/capacity. Requires current reports:read. Customer identities and signed client filters require clients:read. Evidence rechecks all resource permissions. Typed input, complexity and recorded allocation coverage errors are 422 with no partial headline; invalid or inaccessible references are opaque 404. Busy analysis capacity returns 429 analysis_busy with Retry-After: 1 and no partial headline. Ordinary infrastructure faults retain the native 500/503 contracts. Read/preview only. Follow all pagination; a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price.

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": "podyx_v1_reports_capacity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, yet the description still adds substantial behavior: 422 with no partial headline for typed/complexity/allocation errors, opaque 404 for inaccessible references, 429 analysis_busy with Retry-After: 1, and preserved 500/503 contracts. That is exactly the error and throttling context an agent needs before calling. The stray 'a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price' sentence dilutes an otherwise strong disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The operational facts are front-loaded and dense, but the prose is a run-on chain of clauses and includes boilerplate carried over from quote tools ('a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price') that has no bearing on a read-only capacity report.

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?

Auth, failure modes and throttling are well covered, but for a tool with a nested 13-field query object, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the absence of any parameter or result-shape guidance leaves real gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is reported at 0%, so the description is expected to compensate for the nested query parameters, and it does not: page, sort, metric, preset, group_by, from_date/to_date and comparison windows are never explained. Worse, it references 'signed client filters' and clients:read for client_id, which is not a property in the schema, adding a misleading reference.

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?

'Analyze studio capacity' plus the HTTP path gives a specific verb and resource, and 'GET /api/v1/reports/capacity' pins the endpoint. It never distinguishes itself from the crowded reports_* family (metrics, summary, revenue, evidence), so an agent must guess which report answers a capacity question.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It supplies real prerequisites ('Requires current reports:read', clients:read for identities and signed client filters) and a pagination obligation, which is genuine when-to-use context. But there is no routing guidance against sibling report tools and no statement of what this report should not be used for.

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