Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
umami-mcp

umami-mcp

by mikusnuz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_report

Retrieve details of a specific saved Umami Analytics report using its report UUID.

Instructions

Get details of a specific saved report

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": {
      "reportId": "<reportId>"
    },
    "name": "get_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reportIdYesReport UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / reportId / format
      Added value: +"uuid"
  2. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it implies a read-only fetch by using 'Get' and adds the scoping fact that the target is a *saved* report. It stops short of disclosing permission requirements or whether the response includes configuration only or generated results.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though sparse enough that a few more words on the return payload would have cost little.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read with full schema coverage, the definition is workable, but with no output schema it never indicates what 'details' comprises (name, metrics, filters, ownership), leaving an agent to guess at the response shape.

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% and the single parameter is documented as a 'Report UUID', so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the useful disambiguation that this UUID identifies a saved report rather than a website or session.

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 ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific saved report'), clearly distinct from list_reports and run_report by being a single-item fetch. It does not explicitly name when to use it versus get_website_reports or run_report, but the resource noun is unambiguous.

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 use this versus list_reports (discovery), create_report/update_report (mutation), or run_report (execute). The only inference an agent can make is that it needs a known reportId, which comes from the schema, not the description.

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