Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Rephonic

Rephonic

Official
by getrephonic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

trends

Retrieve historical trends data for podcast metrics, returning time-stamped values for metrics like downloads, social reach, and Spotify followers.

Instructions

Returns historical trends data for podcast metrics over time. Each metric returns an array of [unix_timestamp, value] pairs.

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": {
      "podcast_ids": "<podcast_ids>",
      "metrics": "<metrics>"
    },
    "name": "trends"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metricsYesComma-separated list of metrics. Allowed: downloads_per_episode, social_reach, spotify_followers. Maximum 5.
podcast_idsYesComma-separated list of podcast IDs. Maximum 3.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It only repeats parameter constraints already in schema and does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness).

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?

Two efficient sentences with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Missing details about date range specification, which is critical for a trends tool. Does explain return format adequately, but the absence of time range input is a notable gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema; it only describes output format, not parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states it returns historical trends data for podcast metrics over time and describes the output format. Distinguishes from siblings like chart_rankings by focusing on time-series metrics, but lacks 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like chart_rankings or search tools. No mention of prerequisites or context for usage.

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