Skip to main content
Glama

amberflo

by io.usefulapi

Ingest usage event

amberflo_ingest_usage
Destructive

WRITE: record/ingest a single usage meter event (writes billable usage data) to the Amberflo ingestion host. API: POST /ingest/ on the ingest base URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
unique_idNoOptional idempotency/unique id for the event.
dimensionsNoOptional dimensions (key/value string metadata) for the event.
customer_idYesThe customerId this usage belongs to.
meter_valueYesThe numeric value of the usage event.
meter_api_nameYesThe meterApiName this event is for.
meter_time_in_millisYesEvent timestamp, unix epoch milliseconds.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true. The description adds 'WRITE' and 'writes billable usage data', which is consistent but does not add further behavioral context (e.g., idempotency, rate limits, consequences). Low added value beyond annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loading the purpose. The second sentence about the API endpoint is somewhat extraneous for an agent but not harmful. Could be more concise, but efficient overall.

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?

The tool has no output schema and the description does not mention return values or success/error behavior. For a write tool with 6 parameters, this is a gap. However, the required parameters are clear. Adequate but incomplete.

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 descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add any extra meaning or context about parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'WRITE: record/ingest a single usage meter event (writes billable usage data)', specifying the action (ingest), resource (usage meter event), and nature (write). It distinguishes from sibling read tools like amberflo_get_usage.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It mentions the API endpoint but does not provide contextual when-to-use or when-not-to-use information. Score 3 for implied usage but no exclusions.

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

All amberflo 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action and resource (e.g., create_customer vs list_customers, get_customer_plan vs list_customer_plan_history). No two tools overlap in purpose; descriptions clearly differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the consistent pattern amberflo_verb_noun with snake_case. Verbs like create, get, list, assign, explain, ingest are used uniformly, and nouns consistently represent the resource (customer, usage, meters, etc.).

Tool Count5/5

14 tools is well-scoped for a billing/metering server, covering customer management, plan assignment, invoices, usage ingestion/querying, and meter discovery. Each tool serves a clear purpose without excess.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers essential CRUD and lifecycle operations for customers, plans, invoices, and usage. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no update or delete customer, no unassign plan), but the core workflows are fully supported.

Resources