Skip to main content
Glama

Tomba MCP Server

by io.github.tomba-io

Usage Info

usage_info
Read-only

Get current API usage statistics across all endpoints

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

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: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description consistently describes a read-only operation. It adds useful scope context by specifying 'across all endpoints' and indicates a snapshot of current usage, which goes slightly beyond the structured annotations.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately names the action and the resource. No filler or redundant repetition of the tool name exists.

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 parameterless read-only tool with an output schema provided, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to call it. No additional behavioral or return-value details are necessary given the annotations and schema.

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, and the description correctly adds no parameter-specific details. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already communicates.

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?

The description clearly states a specific action ('Get') and a well-defined resource ('current API usage statistics across all endpoints'). It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like account_info or get_logs, but the resource is specific enough that an agent can infer the tool's role.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool should be used when current API usage statistics are needed, but it provides no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. With many sibling tools present, explicit routing would be more helpful.

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

All Tomba MCP Server 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes: email_enrichment and person_enrichment are nearly identical, and every mpp_* tool duplicates a non-MPP tool with only payment method differences. Domain-related tools like domain_search, email_count, and domain_status also blur boundaries, making selection error-prone.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a readable snake_case convention with clear actions like list_, create_, get, and finder/verifier/enrichment suffixes. However, ordering is inconsistent (companies_search vs domain_search, combined_enrichment vs email_finder) and a few vague names like location and autocomplete break the pattern.

Tool Count2/5

38 tools is excessive for this server's scope, especially since 10 are MPP variants that simply duplicate existing functionality with a different payment model. The core feature set could be expressed in roughly half the tools without losing capability.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core Tomba workflows well: email finding, verification, enrichment, domain/company search, phone lookup, and lead management. Minor gaps exist, such as no update/delete operations for leads and no detailed lead retrieval, but agents can work around these for most prospecting tasks.

Resources