Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

OP3 MCP

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Raw download rows for a show, with every filter OP3 offers

op3_query_downloads
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch raw podcast download rows for a show using filters like date range, episode, and bot inclusion. Use when aggregate analytics cannot answer your question.

Instructions

Raw download rows for a show, with every filter OP3 offers. This is the escape hatch for questions the aggregating tools do not cover. Prefer op3_show_downloads, op3_audience_summary, op3_geography or op3_app_share when they can answer the question, because raw rows are slow to fetch and expensive to reason over. Rows come back oldest first and OP3 offers no way to reverse that on this endpoint, so the limit takes the earliest rows in the window: to see recent activity, narrow the window with start rather than raising the limit. Per-listener identifiers are removed from the output.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoWindow end. Defaults to now.
botsNoReturn raw request rows instead of OP3's deduplicated download count. This adds bot traffic and also switches off OP3's download calculation, so the row count rises for reasons beyond bots. Off by default, which matches every other download figure OP3 reports.
limitNoRows to return. Kept low on purpose: these rows are wide and fill a context window fast.
startNoWindow start, e.g. -24h, -7d, 2026-08-01. Defaults to -30d.
episode_idNoRestrict to one episode, by its 64-character OP3 episode id.
identifierYesAn OP3 show uuid, a podcast:guid, or the show's RSS feed URL.
include_listener_keysNoInclude a shortened, non-reversible listener label so rows can be told apart by listener. The full audienceId and hashedIpAddress are never returned either way.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds non-obvious behavior the annotations cannot: rows return oldest-first with no reversal option, limit therefore takes the earliest rows, raw rows are costly, and per-listener identifiers are stripped from output. These are exactly the traits an agent needs before calling.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then exclusions, then the ordering/limit caveat, then the privacy note. Every sentence carries distinct, decision-relevant information with no filler.

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?

For a wide raw-row endpoint with no output schema, it covers ordering, scoping, cost and PII removal well, which is most of what matters. The one gap is that it never indicates what columns or fields the raw rows actually contain, leaving the agent to discover the row shape blind.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema itself explains bots, limit and include_listener_keys well, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning the schema does not: the coupling between start and limit (limit takes the earliest rows in the window) and the privacy consequence of the listener-key parameter. It does not restate parameter formats, which is appropriate.

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 verb+resource ('raw download rows for a show') and positions itself precisely as the escape hatch beyond the aggregating tools. It names four sibling tools it is not, so an agent can route correctly 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives: prefer op3_show_downloads, op3_audience_summary, op3_geography or op3_app_share when they suffice, with the reason (raw rows are slow to fetch and expensive to reason over). It also gives the correct workaround for recent activity (narrow with start rather than raising limit), which is real operational guidance.

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