Skip to main content
Glama
factreason

factreason

Official
by factreason
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

factreason_api_breaking_changes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare third-party API versions to identify removed endpoints, parameter changes, and migration notes for upgrade planning.

Instructions

Temporarily unavailable for third-party APIs while stored comparisons are revalidated; calls return an unbilled status and alternatives. When restored, this compares optional from/to API versions and returns removed endpoints, parameter changes, and migration notes. Use factreason_package_upgrade_advisory for npm or PyPI packages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceYesThird-party API service, e.g. "Stripe" or "OpenAI"
toVersionNoOptional exact version being evaluated
fromVersionNoOptional exact version currently targeted

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
foundNo
billedNo
changesNo
meaningNo
messageNo
serviceNo
suggestionNo
changeCountNo
alternativesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv2.0.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / fromVersion / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: version currently targeted"New value: +"Optional exact version currently targeted"
    • addedInput schema / properties / fromVersion / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / service / description
      Previous value: -"Service name, e.g. \"Stripe\", \"OpenAI\", \"Supabase\""New value: +"Third-party API service, e.g. \"Stripe\" or \"OpenAI\""
    • addedInput schema / properties / service / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / toVersion / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: version being upgraded to"New value: +"Optional exact version being evaluated"
    • addedInput schema / properties / toVersion / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "alternatives": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "billed": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "changeCount": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "changes": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "found": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "meaning": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "service": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "suggestion": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses the temporary unavailability and that calls will return an unbilled status and alternatives. This is important behavioral context not captured elsewhere. It also outlines future behavior, enhancing transparency.

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 concise, two sentences, and both sentences contribute valuable information: the current temporary state and the core functionality with an alternative reference. It is front-loaded with the most urgent caveat and structured logically.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description provides sufficient context: it explains the temporary state, the comparison logic, and the type of results. It also covers the alternative for packages. No critical gaps are evident for a read-only tool.

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?

The schema already documents all three parameters with full coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning, only clarifying that from/to versions are optional and used for comparison. This is marginal but not beyond what schema descriptions already convey.

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 tool compares optional from/to API versions and returns specific outputs (removed endpoints, parameter changes, migration notes). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling factreason_package_upgrade_advisory, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly directs users to use factreason_package_upgrade_advisory for npm/PyPI packages, which is a clear alternative. It also notes the temporary unavailability, giving context on current usage expectations. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool beyond implicit third-party API scenarios.

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