Home / Token cost / ACR — Agent Composition Records

The ACR — Agent Composition Records MCP server costs 8,076 tokens before the first call.

Connect ACR — Agent Composition Records and its 30 tool definitions are loaded into the model's context on every request — 4.0% of a 200k window spent before your agent does anything.

QUICK ANSWER The ACR — Agent Composition Records MCP server's tool definitions consume 8,076 tokens — 4.2× the median MCP server (1,905 tokens). A scoped grant exposing only the tools you use cuts that roughly in proportion.

MEASURED FROM SCHEMAS 30 tools · 8,076 tokens · 4.0% of 200k · 0.8% of 1M Method →

What that buys before your agent starts working.

Tool definitions are overhead: they occupy context on every request and compete with your code, documents and conversation history for the same window.

200K WINDOW 4.0%
1M WINDOW 0.8%

Corpus context: ACR — Agent Composition Records ranks #272 of 3,213 measured MCP servers by definition cost. The median is 1,905 tokens, p90 is 7,952, and the heaviest (Fusionauth) is 183,337 — 92% of a 200k window on its own.

Where the 8,076 tokens go.

Each row is one tool definition as a tools/list entry — name, description and input schema — counted with o200k_base. Average: 269 tokens per tool.

ToolCategoryTokens% of server
log_interaction Write 1,450 18.0%
register_agent Write 621 7.7%
update_composition Write 545 6.7%
get_compensation_signatures Read 464 5.7%
get_revealed_preference Read 436 5.4%
set_watch Write 378 4.7%
get_friction_report Read 335 4.1%
get_interaction_log Read 332 4.1%
search_skills Read 276 3.4%
dismiss_pattern Read 229 2.8%
get_stable_corridors Read 210 2.6%
get_trend Read 205 2.5%
get_skill_tracker Read 203 2.5%
get_coverage Read 195 2.4%
get_failure_registry Read 193 2.4%
check_entity Read 187 2.3%
get_notifications Read 184 2.3%
get_composition_diff Read 181 2.2%
acknowledge_signal Destructive 180 2.2%
get_network_status Read 166 2.1%
configure_deep_composition Write 144 1.8%
summarize_my_agent Read 137 1.7%
get_profile Read 134 1.7%
orient_me Execute 131 1.6%
whats_new Execute 128 1.6%
list_watches Read 123 1.5%
get_skill_versions Read 93 1.2%
check_environment Read 79 1.0%
get_my_agent Read 69 0.9%
get_tier_features Read 68 0.8%

Most agents use a handful of these tools. They pay for all 30.

A PolicyLayer grant exposes only the tools you allow — ungranted definitions are filtered out of the tool list, so they never enter the context window. Estimates below assume typical-weight tools (269 tokens each).

Grant scopeDefinition costReduction
All 30 tools (no gateway) 8,076 tokens
3 granted tools ~808 tokens −90%
5 granted tools ~1,346 tokens −83%
10 granted tools ~2,692 tokens −67%

ACR — Agent Composition Records token-cost questions.

How many tokens does the ACR — Agent Composition Records MCP server use?+

Its 30 tool definitions total 8,076 tokens — 4.0% of a 200k context window — measured with tiktoken o200k_base over the serialised tools/list payload. Exact counts vary slightly by client and model.

Why does ACR — Agent Composition Records consume tokens before I send a message?+

MCP clients load every connected server's tool definitions — name, description, and input schema — into the model's context so it knows what it can call. That payload is charged against your context window on every request, whether or not a tool is used.

How do I reduce ACR — Agent Composition Records's token usage?+

Expose fewer tools. A PolicyLayer grant scopes ACR — Agent Composition Records to only the tools you allow — ungranted definitions are filtered out of the tool list, so they never enter the context window. A grant of 3 typical tools costs roughly 808 tokens, a 90% reduction.

Does deferred tool loading fix this?+

Partially, in some clients. Claude Code defers MCP tool schemas behind a tool-search step by default, and VS Code has experimental grouping — but you still pay tokens per search and reload, and Cursor, Windsurf and Gemini CLI load definitions upfront. Reducing the exposed tool set cuts the cost in every client.

How these numbers were measured.

01
Serialisation

Each tool is serialised as a tools/list entry — name, description, input schema — from the schemas in the PolicyLayer scan database. Clients differ slightly in framing, so treat counts as close estimates.

02
Tokeniser

tiktoken o200k_base (GPT-4o/o-series). Anthropic's current tokeniser isn't published, so Claude's exact counts will differ; for English text and JSON schemas the totals are close enough to treat these as estimates.

03
Deferred loading

Some clients now defer schema loading (Claude Code's tool search; VS Code experimental grouping). You still pay per search and reload — and Cursor, Windsurf and Gemini CLI load everything upfront.

Computed 07-06-2026 from the PolicyLayer scan database over all 30 catalogued ACR — Agent Composition Records tools. Counts refresh with every site build.

Expose only the tools you use — the rest never enter your context.

A PolicyLayer grant scopes ACR — Agent Composition Records to the tools you actually allow. Ungranted definitions never load, and every call that does run is checked against policy first.

Free to start. No card required.

4,600+ MCP servers and 31,000+ tools scanned and risk-classified.

// GET IN TOUCH

Have a question or want to learn more? Send us a message.

Message sent.

We'll get back to you soon.