Skip to main content
Glama

vibedeploy

by be.vibedeploy

Read plan, limits, and current usage

get_account
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the team's plan, its limits, and current usage. Use this BEFORE deploy_site or add_custom_domain to know whether a deploy would trip a plan limit, instead of provoking PLAN_LIMIT_EXCEEDED. Also returns the per-token MCP rate-limit ceiling (live remaining is in X-RateLimit-Remaining response header).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYesEffective plan name: Free, Solo, Freemium, Maker, Studio, Business, Ultimate.
teamYes
usageYes
limitsYes
request_idNoServer-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.
planExpiresAtYesISO timestamp when the plan downgrades to Free, or null if no expiry set.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / plan / description
      Previous value: -"Effective plan name: Free, Freemium, Maker, Studio, Business, Ultimate."New value: +"Effective plan name: Free, Solo, Freemium, Maker, Studio, Business, Ultimate."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / request_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it also returns the per-token MCP rate-limit ceiling and points to the X-RateLimit-Remaining response header for live remaining usage. This matches the kind of rate-limit and side-effect transparency that helps an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core return value, the second gives targeted pre-flight usage guidance and an additional behavioral detail about rate-limit headers. Every clause adds value.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is fully sufficient. It explains what the tool returns, when to use it before related operations, and where to find live rate-limit data, leaving no meaningful gap for selection or invocation.

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 has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty and there is nothing for the description to clarify about arguments. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, this is effectively complete; the description instead clarifies what the response contains, which is the relevant semantic information.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return the team's plan, its limits, and current usage.' This clearly distinguishes it as a read-only account/limits inspection tool, and the title reinforces the same message. The naming of deploy_site and add_custom_domain in the usage guidance further separates it from those action-oriented siblings.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this BEFORE deploy_site or add_custom_domain to know whether a deploy would trip a plan limit, instead of provoking PLAN_LIMIT_EXCEEDED.' This gives the agent a concrete decision rule and names the relevant alternative operations.

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

All vibedeploy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action—deploy, file, domain, snapshot, form, analytics—and the descriptions carefully clarify overlap (e.g., deploy_site vs update_site vs begin_deploy). A few pairs like read_file/read_source_file or list_file_hashes/list_source_files could be confused, but the pattern is clear enough to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_, list_, get_, read_, update_, delete_, verify_, etc.), with singular verbs for single resources and plural verbs for batches. This makes the surface highly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

39 tools is well beyond the typical well-scoped surface and many could be consolidated (e.g., read_file/read_files/read_source_file/read_source_files, or the multiple deploy entry points). The broad domain explains some of the count, but the set feels bloated and will slow tool selection.

Completeness3/5

The core deploy lifecycle is well covered: create/read/update/delete sites, patch files, manage custom domains, and configure forms. However, there are notable gaps—snapshots can be created and listed but not restored or deleted, and there is no explicit rollback-to-previous-deploy mechanism, which are common expectations for a deployment platform.

Resources