codechef-mcp

Get CodeChef submission activity

get_activity

Read-only

Summarize a CodeChef user's submission heat map over a time window into totals, active days, busiest day, and monthly counts without loading the image or HTML.

Instructions

Summarize a user's submission heat map over a time window: total submissions, active days, average per active day, busiest day and monthly totals. Answers 'how active is X' without loading the heat map image or HTML.

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": {
      "handle": "<handle>"
    },
    "name": "get_activity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`days`	No	Look-back window in days (default 90). Daily breakdown included only when <= 60.
`handle`	Yes	CodeChef username/handle, e.g. 'gennady.korotkevich'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.2Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it clarifies the tool returns aggregate statistics rather than raw data, and that it avoids fetching the heat map image/HTML. It does not mention error behavior for unknown handles or how days beyond the daily-breakdown threshold affect the response.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the return-value enumeration is front-loaded before the usage cue. Every clause carries information an agent would not get from the structured fields.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates the returned statistics, which is the key gap-filler for this tool. Read-only annotations cover safety, and the schema covers both parameters, leaving only minor omissions such as failure modes for invalid handles.

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%, and the 'days' parameter already documents its default of 90 and the <=60 daily-breakdown rule in the schema. The description adds no syntax or interpretation beyond that, which is the baseline expectation when the schema does the work.

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?

Names a specific verb (Summarize) and a specific resource (a user's submission heat map over a time window), then enumerates exactly what is returned: totals, active days, average per active day, busiest day, monthly totals. That is enough for an agent to tell it apart from get_solved_problems, get_rating_history, or get_profile without opening any schema.

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?

It supplies the question this tool answers ('how active is X') and a negative usage note ('without loading the heat map image or HTML'), which implies context. However, it never names an alternative sibling or states when a different tool would be the better choice, so the routing guidance remains implicit.

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

Deploy Server