Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
RouterBase MCP

RouterBase MCP

by zenlee123
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Get RouterBase pricing

routerbase_get_pricing

Fetch pricing for a specific RouterBase model or list all active model prices.

Instructions

Fetch RouterBase pricing for one model or all active models.

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": "routerbase_get_pricing"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNoOptional RouterBase API key. Prefer ROUTERBASE_API_KEY.
model_idNoOptional RouterBase model id. Omit to list all pricing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation is fetching (read-only), but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior when api_key is missing. Minimal disclosure beyond the action itself.

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?

One concise sentence with no fluff. Front-loaded with verb and resource, perfectly sized for a simple pricing tool.

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?

Simple tool with no output schema. Description covers what it does but omits return format or pagination. Given simplicity, it's adequate but could benefit from stating the output structure.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds marginal value ('Omit to list all pricing' is already in schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already explains parameters well.

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 clearly states the verb 'Fetch', resource 'RouterBase pricing', and specifies the scope: one model or all active models. It distinguishes from sibling tools like routerbase_chat_completion and routerbase_list_models by focusing on pricing data.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies usage by omitting model_id for all pricing, but lacks context like prerequisites or comparisons to sibling tools.

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