@lodd/mcp-server

get_tech_breakdown

Retrieve browser, operating system, and device type distribution for a website. Filter by country, browser, OS, device type, UTM source, or referrer to segment your tech breakdown.

Instructions

Get browser, operating system, and device type distribution in one call. Optional filters segment by country, browser, os, device type, UTM source, or referrer.

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": {
      "site": "<site>"
    },
    "name": "get_tech_breakdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	Site domain or UUID
`limit`	No	Max results per category (1-1000)
`period`	No	Time period	30d
`filter_os`	No	OS substring match (e.g. 'iOS')
`filter_browser`	No	Browser substring match (e.g. 'Chrome')
`filter_country`	No	2-letter country code (e.g. 'US')
`filter_utm_source`	No	Exact UTM source (e.g. 'twitter')
`filter_device_type`	No	Device type: 'desktop' \| 'mobile' \| 'tablet'
`filter_referrer_contains`	No	Referrer substring (e.g. 'google')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.15Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It describes a read-only operation ('Get') that returns distribution data. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description is adequate but lacks details beyond basic functionality.

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 two sentences long with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the main purpose, and the second lists optional filters. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place.

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?

Given 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and filters but does not specify return format (e.g., structure of distribution data). For a tool with no output schema, more detail on the response would improve completeness. Adequate but with gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing filter dimensions (country, browser, OS, etc.) and indicating they are for segmentation. However, the schema already individually describes each filter parameter, so the description does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 retrieves distribution of browser, operating system, and device type in one call. It mentions optional filters for segmentation. This distinguishes it from sibling analytics tools like get_traffic_sources or get_countries, as it specifically focuses on tech stack breakdown.

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?

The description implicitly indicates usage when needing browser, OS, and device type distributions. It lists optional filters for segmentation but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide comparisons to alternatives. However, given the sibling list, no direct alternative exists, making usage clear.

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