Skip to main content
Glama

cattle-market

by ar.com.consignatarias

quiero_comprar

quiero_comprar
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Quiero comprar 300 terneros en Corrientes" → te devuelve YA los próximos remates programados que matchean (fecha, consignataria, lugar, link) y deja tu búsqueda activa: te avisamos por email o webhook de cada remate nuevo que matchee. GRATIS. Params: categoria (terneros|novillos|vaquillonas|vacas|toros|mixto — acepta sinónimos), cabezas (opcional), provincia (opcional), email y/o webhook_url (al menos uno, para los avisos).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoEmail para los avisos de remates que matcheen
notasNoDetalle libre (raza, peso, condición, plazo…)
cabezasNoCuántas cabezas busca (opcional)
categoriaYesQué busca comprar (terneros, novillos, vaquillonas, vacas, toros, mixto)
provinciaNoDónde (opcional, ej. "Corrientes")
webhook_urlNoWebhook https para avisos programáticos (POST remate.matched)

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description states that the tool 'deja tu búsqueda activa' and sends alerts, implying a side effect (creating a subscription or ongoing notification). This contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=true, which asserts no modifications. The description does not clarify the apparent write behavior.

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 well-structured, starting with an example, then explaining behavior, then listing parameters. It is concise yet comprehensive, with no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the core functionality (returning matches and setting up alerts) and mentions the output fields (fecha, consignataria, lugar, link). However, it omits details on alert management (e.g., how to unsubscribe) and error handling, which would be useful given no output 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds valuable context: it specifies that 'categoria' accepts synonyms and that at least one of 'email' or 'webhook_url' is required (which is not enforced by the schema). This enriches the schema definitions.

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 that the tool returns matching upcoming auctions and sets up alerts for new matches, using a concrete example. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_remates' by combining search with persistent alerting.

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 provides a concrete usage example and explains the dual behavior (immediate results + alerts). However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use it, though the context makes it clear for buyer search and alerts.

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

All cattle-market 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a specific, well-defined aspect of the cattle market domain. Overlaps are minimal and clearly disambiguated in descriptions (e.g., get_precios_hacienda vs. get_precios_detallados vs. get_indice_novillo). Even similar-sounding tools like calcular_arrendamiento and valuar_arrendamiento_campo have distinct purposes (simple calculation vs. valuation with currency options).

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix Spanish and English verb patterns (e.g., 'get_indice_novillo' vs. 'buscar_consignataria', 'contratar_pro_consignataria' vs. 'list_remates'). While each subgroup (sanidad_*, get_*) maintains internal consistency, the overall naming is not unified. However, names are still descriptive and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 22 tools, the server covers a broad domain (prices, health, directories, valuations, alerts) without feeling bloated. Each tool earns its place, providing meaningful functionality. The count is well-scoped for the Argentine cattle market context.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: market data (prices, indices, historical), consignment and slaughterhouse directories, health regulations and movement requirements, valuation tools, alerts, and even a buyer matching service. There are no obvious gaps for the stated purpose of a cattle market MCP server.

Resources