DoubleData MCP

Get traffic limits

get_traffic_limits

Read-only

Retrieve a credential's total, daily, weekly, and monthly traffic limits in MB plus current consumption to monitor usage and avoid overages.

Instructions

Show a credential's total, daily, weekly and monthly traffic limits in MB and current consumption.

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": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "get_traffic_limits"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`username`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the meaningful detail that results include four limit granularities plus current consumption in MB, but it says nothing about which credential is looked up, what happens for an unknown username, or whether consumption is reported in MB or as a percentage.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and enumerating the returned metrics, with no filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the return content well (four limit periods plus consumption). The remaining gaps are minor: unit consistency for consumption and behavior on an unknown username.

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 0%, so the single 'username' parameter is documented only by its regex pattern. The phrase 'a credential's' does link username to the credential being queried, which is real added meaning, but it does not clarify whether this is the credential's login name versus the account owner.

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 uses a concrete verb ('Show') and a precisely scoped resource: a credential's total, daily, weekly and monthly traffic limits plus current consumption. The read-only framing implicitly separates it from set_traffic_limits, though it never names that sibling, so it falls just short of fully explicit differentiation.

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 guidance on when to pick this over set_traffic_limits for limit changes or get_usage/get_balance for other consumption views. The read-only nature of the query is only implied by the word 'Show', leaving the agent to infer the use case.

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