Skip to main content
Glama
avivshafir

revenuebase-mcp-server

get_credits

Check remaining credits for the authenticated user to monitor usage and manage access to RevenueBase MCP server resources.

Instructions

Retrieves the number of remaining credits for the authenticated user.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • server.py:44-54 (handler)
    The handler function that implements the get_credits tool logic by querying the Revenuebase API for the user's remaining credits.
    def get_credits() -> dict:
        """
        Retrieves the number of remaining credits for the authenticated user.
        """
        if not api_key:
            raise RuntimeError("Environment variable REVENUEBASE_API_KEY is not set")
        url = "https://api.revenuebase.ai/v1/credits"
        headers = {"x-key": api_key, "Accept": "application/json"}
        resp = requests.get(url, headers=headers, verify=False)
        resp.raise_for_status()
        return resp.json()
  • server.py:43-43 (registration)
    The decorator that registers the get_credits function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a read operation ('Retrieves'), which is helpful, but doesn't mention potential rate limits, authentication requirements beyond 'authenticated user,' error conditions, or return format. The description adds basic context but lacks detailed behavioral traits.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose with zero wasted words. It immediately communicates what the tool does without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but could be more complete. It explains the purpose clearly but lacks details on return values (e.g., numeric count, object structure), error handling, or dependencies. For a read-only tool with no parameters, this is minimally viable but leaves gaps in behavioral context.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, which is sufficient for this case. No additional parameter semantics are needed beyond what the schema already indicates.

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 the specific action ('Retrieves') and resource ('number of remaining credits for the authenticated user'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on email processing, API keys, and process management rather than credit retrieval.

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?

The description implies usage context by specifying 'for the authenticated user,' suggesting this tool should be used when checking credit balances. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (none of which appear to be credit-related), nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/avivshafir/revenuebase-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server