Skip to main content
Glama
arttus

umami-mcp-server

by arttus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Umami websites

umami_list_websites
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all websites tracked in an Umami account, including team-owned sites. Use it to find a website ID by name or domain before querying other analytics tools.

Instructions

List every website tracked in this Umami account, including websites owned by teams.

Start here when you do not already know a website ID. Every other tool accepts a website ID, name, or domain, so this tool is what turns "the marketing site" into something queryable.

Args:

  • search (string, optional): Case-insensitive substring matched against name and domain.

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): Output format (default: 'markdown').

Returns: JSON shape: { "count": number, "websites": [ { "id": string, "name": string, "domain": string, "created_at": string, "team_id": string | null } ] }

Examples:

  • "What sites do I have in Umami?" -> no arguments

  • "Find the website for example.com" -> search="example.com"

Error handling:

  • Returns an authentication error if the API key or login is rejected.

  • Returns "No websites found" when the account has none.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNoOptional case-insensitive substring to match against website name or domain.
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for a readable summary, 'json' for raw structured data.markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: team-owned websites are included, output shape is specified, and error behavior (auth failure vs 'No websites found') is disclosed.

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?

Well-structured with clear Args, Returns, Examples, and Error handling sections. The key 'start here' advice is front-loaded, and each section earns its place without redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description provides the full JSON return shape, parameter details, use-case examples, and error handling. An agent has everything needed to invoke the tool correctly and interpret the result.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mostly restates the schema's parameter info, though the examples ('search="example.com"') add a small amount of practical guidance 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List every website tracked in this Umami account') and immediately clarifies scope ('including websites owned by teams'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by framing this as the discovery entry point when a website ID is unknown.

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 tells the agent to 'Start here when you do not already know a website ID' and explains that every other tool takes an ID, name, or domain. It could name a specific alternative like umami_get_website for the already-known-ID case, but the guidance is still clear and actionable.

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