Skip to main content
Glama

wikiviews

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Article Views

get_article_views
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get daily pageview counts for a specific Wikipedia article over a date range. Dates must be in YYYYMMDD format.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesEnd date in YYYYMMDD format (e.g. "20240131")
startYesStart date in YYYYMMDD format (e.g. "20240101")
titleYesWikipedia article title, URL-encoded if needed (e.g. "Albert_Einstein")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesEnd date in YYYYMMDD format
dailyYesDaily pageview breakdown
startYesStart date in YYYYMMDD format
articleYesWikipedia article title
total_viewsYesTotal pageviews across date range

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "article": {
+      "description": "Wikipedia article title",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "daily": {
+      "description": "Daily pageview breakdown",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "date": {
+            "description": "Date in YYYYMMDD format",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "views": {
+            "description": "Pageviews for that day",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "date",
+          "views"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "end": {
+      "description": "End date in YYYYMMDD format",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "start": {
+      "description": "Start date in YYYYMMDD format",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "total_views": {
+      "description": "Total pageviews across date range",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "article",
+    "start",
+    "end",
+    "total_views",
+    "daily"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "end": "20240131",
+    "start": "20240101",
+    "title": "Albert_Einstein"
+  },
+  {
+    "end": "20231231",
+    "start": "20230101",
+    "title": "COVID-19_pandemic"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the date-range scoping and daily granularity, but no additional behavioral traits like return format or pagination. With annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states the purpose and scope; the second provides a key validation requirement. Every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple, read-only tool with three fully described parameters, an output schema, and comprehensive annotations. The description is sufficient for correct selection and invocation without additional context.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter is already described with format and example. The tool description reinforces the date format but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the resource ('daily pageview counts for a specific Wikipedia article') with scope ('over a date range'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_project_views and get_top_articles.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need pageview counts for a specific Wikipedia article within a date range. It does not explicitly provide alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong given the sibling tool names.

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

All wikiviews 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose, from Wikipedia page views to AI visibility checks, entity resolution, and Polymarket betting. No two tools appear overlapping in functionality; descriptions further clarify each tool's unique role.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with clear verb_noun structure (e.g., get_article_views, subscribe, resolve_entity). No mixing of conventions, and names are descriptive enough to infer purpose.

Tool Count2/5

With 33 tools, the server is overloaded for its name 'wikiviews', which suggests a focused Wikipedia views tool. The set includes unrelated functionality like Polymarket arbitrage, memory storage, and Pipeworx data queries, making the scope feel excessive.

Completeness2/5

For the core domain of Wikipedia views, only 3 tools exist (get_article_views, get_project_views, get_top_articles), missing basic operations like list_articles_per_day. The unrelated tools are extensive, but the server's stated purpose is poorly served.

Resources