Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

model_revenue

Read-only

Retrieve revenue summaries for a specific 3D model using its file hash or listing ID, enabling quick earnings tracking and performance review.

Instructions

Get revenue summary for a specific model.

        Args:
            model_id: File hash or listing ID of the model.

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": {
      "model_id": "<model_id>"
    },
    "name": "model_revenue"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
model_idYesFile hash or listing ID of the model.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_id / description
      Added value: +"File hash or listing ID of the model."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without description support. Beyond restating that it is a per-model read, the description adds no behavioral context such as the time window aggregated, whether amounts are gross or net, currency, or pagination. It does not contradict the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose statement is one front-loaded sentence with no padding. The trailing 'Args:' block is a leftover docstring that duplicates the schema text verbatim and earns no place, but the overall footprint is small.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and non-destructive annotations, the definition is minimally sufficient to invoke it. However, with no output schema, nothing explains what a 'revenue summary' contains (period, granularity, totals vs breakdown), and the ambiguity against revenue_dashboard is unresolved.

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% and the single parameter is documented in the schema; the description simply repeats the schema sentence verbatim ('File hash or listing ID of the model') and adds no meaning beyond it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does all the work.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Get revenue summary') plus a scope qualifier ('for a specific model'), which distinguishes it from the aggregate sibling revenue_dashboard and from record_revenue. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the relationship to revenue_dashboard and usage_summary on its own.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative. Given the crowded billing/analytics area of the sibling list (revenue_dashboard, record_revenue, usage_summary, printer_usage_summary, tax_estimate), the absence of any routing hint is a real gap.

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