planvortex-mcp

Official

by taliasoftworks

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Get plan usage

get_plan_use

Read-only

Check an organization's plan limits and current usage for accounts, storage, and integrations before promising features; publications are unlimited on every plan.

Instructions

What the organization's plan allows and what it has already used: accounts, storage and integrations. Check this before promising the user a connected account — a plan limit is not a transient error and retrying never fixes it. PUBLICATIONS ARE UNLIMITED on every plan: the count is reported for context and has no ceiling, so never refuse to schedule posts over it. What can stop a batch is rate — a per-hour cap per account and a daily cap per network, both in get_social_limits — and that one IS transient: waiting fixes it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id_organization`	No	The PlanVortex organization id. Optional: resolved automatically when there is only one to choose from, or when the server was configured with a default one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`used`	Yes
`limits`	Yes
`assigned`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.11.1Oct 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / id_organization / description

Previous value: -"The PlanVortex organization id. Optional: if this app reaches a single organization, or the server was configured with a default one, it is resolved automatically."New value: +"The PlanVortex organization id. Optional: resolved automatically when there is only one to choose from, or when the server was configured with a default one."

Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0Sep 26, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedv0.1.0Aug 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare it a safe read (readOnly/openWorld/destructive), while the description adds non-obvious behavior an agent cannot get elsewhere: plan limits are permanent and retrying never fixes them, publications are uncapped on every plan, and rate limits are transient. This directly shapes downstream agent decisions rather than restating safety hints.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns, then the decisions it should drive. Dense and mostly waste-free, though the plan-limit/retry point and the publication caveat are each restated slightly, adding a little redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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 prose, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description fills the remaining gap with the domain rules (uncapped publications, permanent plan limits, transient rates) an agent needs to call and act on this tool correctly.

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 id_organization parameter is fully documented there, including its optional/auto-resolution behavior. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (the organization's plan allowances and consumption: accounts, storage, integrations) with a clear verb framing. It also distinguishes itself from get_social_limits by assigning rate caps to that sibling, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-check guidance ('before promising the user a connected account'), plus explicit when-not-to-act ('never refuse to schedule posts' over publication count) and a named alternative for the transient case ('both in get_social_limits'). It also gives the retry heuristic: plan limits are not transient, rate limits are.

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