Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vish288

mcp-coda

by vish288
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Coda Get Analytics Updated

coda_get_analytics_updated
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the timestamp when analytics data was last updated to verify freshness before making time-sensitive decisions.

Instructions

Get the timestamp of when analytics data was last updated.

Returns a timestamp indicating the freshness of analytics data. Analytics are not real-time — they are typically updated every few hours. Check this before relying on analytics data for time-sensitive decisions.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.4.14

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: analytics are not real-time and refresh every few hours. With no output schema, stating 'Returns a timestamp' is a helpful disclosure.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Minor redundancy: 'Get the timestamp of when analytics data was last updated' and 'Returns a timestamp indicating the freshness' say nearly the same thing.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers what it returns (a timestamp) and why it matters (freshness before time-sensitive decisions). Adequate; only the lack of explicit sibling routing keeps it from being fully complete.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and it correctly stays silent on inputs. Baseline 4 applies.

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 and resource: 'Get the timestamp of when analytics data was last updated.' The purpose is self-evidently distinct from the analytics-listing siblings (coda_list_doc_analytics, coda_get_pack_analytics_summary), but the description never names or contrasts those siblings explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear usage context: 'Check this before relying on analytics data for time-sensitive decisions.' This tells the agent when the tool is worthwhile, though it names no alternative and states no exclusions.

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