Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SMSC MCP

SMSC MCP

by heist1337
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Smsc Analytics

smsc_analytics
Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze local messaging history and cost data without API credentials, using coverage checks and breakdowns to distinguish missing cached records from zero spending.

Instructions

Analyze accumulated local history without loading API credentials. Operations: coverage, summary, breakdown, messages, repeats, snapshots, reconcile. Check coverage/truncated; empty or partial cache is not zero spending.

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": {
      "operation": "<operation>",
      "start": "<start>",
      "end": "<end>"
    },
    "name": "smsc_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYes
limitNo
startYes
filtersNo
before_idNo
operationYes
dimensionsNo
include_textNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, closed-world, and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real value: it discloses that data comes from a local accumulated cache rather than live API calls, and warns that empty or partial results are not equivalent to zero spending. It stops short of explaining cache staleness or how refresh interacts with this data.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core capability before the operation list and the caveat. The phrasing 'Check coverage/truncated' is telegraphic and slightly opaque, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the operation list plus cache caveat cover the essentials for calling the tool. However, for an 8-parameter tool with zero schema description coverage, leaving date format, filter shape, pagination (before_id), and dimensions entirely unexplained is a meaningful 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 0% across 8 parameters, so the description must compensate. It does enumerate the valid operation values (coverage, summary, breakdown, messages, repeats, snapshots, reconcile), which is genuinely useful since 'operation' is a free-form string with no enum, but start/end/limit/filters/before_id/dimensions/include_text remain completely undocumented anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('accumulated local history') and enumerates the seven supported operations, which tells an agent exactly what the tool can do. The phrase 'without loading API credentials' implicitly distinguishes it from the refresh-style sibling, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation relies on inference.

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?

Usage context is only implied: the local-cache/no-credentials framing suggests when this is preferable to credential-backed siblings like smsc_refresh or smsc_cost_report, and 'Check coverage/truncated' hints at a pre-check step. There is no explicit statement of when to choose this over the four siblings or when not to use it.

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