cursor-usage

get_daily_usage

Retrieve daily usage metrics per user, including lines modified, applies, accepts, rejects, tabs, mode-specific requests, models used, and client versions.

Instructions

Get daily usage data per user: lines added/deleted, applies, accepts, rejects, tabs, requests by mode (composer/chat/agent), models used, and client versions.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_daily_usage"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (default: 1)
`endDate`	No	End date as Unix timestamp in milliseconds
`allPages`	No	Fetch all pages automatically (default: false)
`pageSize`	No	Results per page (default: 100)
`startDate`	No	Start date as Unix timestamp in milliseconds

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.2Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or data freshness. It only states 'per user', which is a minimal behavioral detail.

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?

The description is a single sentence listing key data points, which is concise. However, it could be structured with bullet points for readability. Every word adds value, but the list is dense.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema. The description hints at the returned fields but does not specify the structure of the response (e.g., is it an array? are dates included?). Given the complexity, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 lists the data fields returned but does not add meaning beyond the parameter names and descriptions already in the schema. It does not explain parameter constraints or relationships.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'daily usage data per user', listing concrete metrics (lines, applies, accepts, etc.). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_dau (daily active users) by specifying per-user granularity and data types.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving daily usage data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_model_usage, get_usage_events). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server