A
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceFeriados Brasileiros direto no seu agente de IA,
consulte feriados nacionais, estaduais e municipais
9
11
MIT
Adoteca — Adoção de Pets no Brasil
Server Details
Cães e gatos para adoção no Brasil, de ONGs e protetores. Busque por cidade, porte, idade e saúde.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
A4.2/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 4.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
search_pets and get_pet_details have clearly distinct purposes: one finds adoptable pets, the other retrieves detailed information about a specific pet. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tools follow the consistent verb_noun pattern (search_pets, get_pet_details). The naming is predictable and aligns with the server's domain.
Tool Count3/5
With only 2 tools, the server feels slightly thin for the domain of pet adoption. While the tools cover the core search-to-detail flow, the count is borderline per the rubric.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the essential adoption workflow: search for pets and view full details including contact information. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct adoption application), but agents can successfully assist users with the available tools.
Available Tools
2 toolsget_pet_detailsVer ficha completa do petARead-onlyInspect
Ficha completa de um pet: saúde, cuidados, convivência e como falar com a ONG. Aceita o código curto do link ou o id devolvido por searchPets. Leia status antes de oferecer, e o status de cada health_conditions antes de falar da saúde dele.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pet_ref | Yes | Código curto do pet (ex.: 'ab12cd') ou o identificador da ficha. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the base safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations by instructing the agent to check the `status` field of the pet and each `health_conditions` entry before discussing them, implying that some statuses may make the pet unavailable or the health info sensitive. This is useful operational insight that cannot be inferred from the annotations alone.
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 composed of two dense, purposeful sentences. The first sentence defines the resource and scope, and the second provides usage parameters and critical data-reading guidance. There is zero filler or repetition of schema/annotation content, making it compact and effective.
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?
Given the presence of an output schema (so return values are already documented) and simple one-parameter input, the description fully covers the necessary context: purpose, usage source of the identifier, and important caveats about status fields. The agent has enough information to select and use the tool correctly.
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 schema already provides a full description of the `pet_ref` parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by specifying that the parameter can be a short code from a link or the id returned by searchPets, which enriches its meaning and clarifies the expected format beyond the schema's generic 'Código curto do pet'.
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 opens with 'Ficha completa de um pet' (complete pet record) and enumerates the specific content areas (health, care, coexistence, NGO contact), making the purpose unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool search_pets by explicitly referencing the id returned by that tool, clarifying its role as the detail-fetch companion.
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 states that the tool accepts a short code or the id from searchPets, which tells the agent when to use it (after searching). It also gives practical instructions on reading status fields before offering, providing context on how to act on the data. However, it doesn't explicitly mention cases where the tool should not be used, but with only one sibling, this gap is minor.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_petsBuscar pets para adoçãoARead-onlyInspect
Busca cães e gatos para adoção em ONGs e protetores do Brasil. Use sempre que alguém quiser adotar. Mostre o adoption_url de cada pet e nunca invente pets. Os resultados incluem pets já adotados: leia status e só ofereça os 'available'.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sex | No | Sexo: 'male'/'macho' ou 'female'/'femea'. | |
| city | No | Nome do MUNICÍPIO por extenso, não do bairro nem abreviado: 'Belo Horizonte', não 'BH'. Acento é opcional. Se o nome for ambíguo, ou se nenhuma ONG tiver pets ali hoje, o erro explica o que fazer — leia e siga; não significa que a cidade não exista. | |
| page | No | Página, começando em 1. | |
| size | No | Porte: 'small'/'pequeno', 'medium'/'medio', 'large'/'grande'. | |
| limit | No | Quantos pets devolver por página. Valores acima de 24 são reduzidos a 24. | |
| state | No | Sigla de duas letras da UF (SP, MG), apenas para desambiguar `city`. Busca só por estado NÃO é suportada: sempre envie `city` junto. | |
| species | No | Espécie: 'dog'/'cachorro' ou 'cat'/'gato'. | |
| neutered | No | true devolve somente pets castrados. `false` é IGNORADO pelo mesmo motivo de `vaccinated`; leia `neutered` na ficha do pet. | |
| vaccinated | No | true devolve somente pets vacinados. `false` é IGNORADO: a maioria dos anúncios não informa vacinação, então filtrar por 'não vacinado' esconderia quase todo o catálogo. Para saber de um pet específico, leia `vaccinated` na ficha (null = a ONG não informou). | |
| include_older | No | Por padrão só devolvemos pets anunciados nos últimos 90 dias, para não oferecer pets que provavelmente já foram adotados. Só ative se a pessoa pedir explicitamente anúncios antigos. | |
| special_needs | No | true devolve somente pets com cuidados especiais; false devolve somente os que não têm nenhum registrado. | |
| age_max_months | No | Idade máxima em meses. O catálogo só distingue três faixas — filhote (até 12 meses), adulto (12 a 96) e idoso (96+) — então 6 e 12 selecionam os mesmos pets. | |
| good_with_cats | No | Somente pets que convivem bem com gatos. | |
| good_with_dogs | No | Somente pets que convivem bem com cães. | |
| good_with_kids | No | Somente pets que convivem bem com crianças. |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A4/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds valuable context by warning that results include already adopted pets, instructing to check the status field, and telling the agent to show adoption_url and never invent pets. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.
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 three sentences long, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second gives a usage trigger, and the third warns about adopted pets. It is front-loaded and free of filler.
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?
With an output schema present and fully documented parameters, the description need not explain return values or syntax. It covers the key non-obvious behaviors (adopted pets, adoption_url, no inventing) and the usage trigger, making it sufficiently complete for a search tool.
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 each parameter having a rich description. The tool description itself does not mention any parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies; it neither adds nor detracts from the schema's semantics.
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 the tool searches for dogs and cats for adoption in Brazilian NGOs, using a specific verb and scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool get_pet_details, so it falls short of a 5 by the rubric's sibling differentiation criterion.
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 explicitly says 'Use sempre que alguém quiser adotar' (use whenever someone wants to adopt), providing a clear when-to-use context. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- Alicense-qualityCmaintenanceConsulta dados cadastrais de CNPJ (razão social, sócios, CNAE) e descobre processos judiciais da empresa e sócios no Diário de Justiça Eletrônico Nacional.1MIT
- Flicense-qualityDmaintenanceEnables searching for adoptable animals in Taiwan's public shelters and listing shelters.
- Apache 2.0