Skip to main content
Glama

Operator statistics for a model

jt_operators_stats
Read-onlyIdempotent

AGGREGATED operator statistics of a model in Brazil: distinct operators (by CNPJ root), RBAC 91 vs 135 split, concentration by state, average fleet age, plus as_of (RAB snapshot date), source.url and scope (only mark reservations or tails classified as RBAC 91/135). This aggregate never names operators; jt_fleet_search and jt_owner_fleet do return names (their own plan applies).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesSlug do modelo.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoMachine-readable error code (INTERNAL, TIMEOUT, INVALID_ARGUMENT, NOT_FOUND, TOOL_FAILED, ACCOUNT_KEY_REQUIRED).
_metaNo
errorNo
foundNo
gatedNo
requestIdNo
retryableNo
quota_exceededNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / asOf / description
      Added value: +"Alias of sourceUpdatedAt (kept for compatibility)."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / generatedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "When this response was produced (ISO 8601).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / observedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Last event actually observed in the data returned (last flight, last arrival, last listing sighting)."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / sourceUpdatedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Last sync of the underlying source (RAB snapshot, registry import, listing scan). Never in the future."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / validUntil
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Expiry of the fact returned, when it has one (CVA validity, period end)."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / code
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Machine-readable error code (INTERNAL, TIMEOUT, INVALID_ARGUMENT, NOT_FOUND, TOOL_FAILED, ACCOUNT_KEY_REQUIRED).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / requestId
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / retryable
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: the aggregate excludes operator names, uses RBAC 91/135 classification, includes an as_of snapshot date, and only marks reservations/tails in scope. This provides useful context without contradicting the 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 front-loaded with the essential purpose and contains dense but relevant detail. The first sentence packs a large amount of useful information, and the second sentence efficiently disambiguates from sibling tools. It is slightly long due to enumerating many output facets, but nothing is wasted.

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 purpose, output facets, scope, and alternative tools, while the presence of an output schema and full parameter schema covers structural details. It could be slightly stronger with an explicit 'use when' statement, but given the annotation coverage and the clear sibling distinction, it is substantially complete.

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?

There is only one parameter, slug, and the input schema already describes it ('Slug do modelo.') with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add fields to the slug semantics, but it does indirectly clarify that the slug refers to a model whose operator statistics are being requested. Since schema coverage is complete, the baseline of 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 identifies the tool as providing 'AGGREGATED operator statistics of a model in Brazil' and enumerates specific outputs: distinct operators by CNPJ root, RBAC 91 vs 135 split, concentration by state, and average fleet age. It also explicitly contrasts itself with siblings that return operator names, removing ambiguity about its role.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description effectively routes usage by stating that this aggregate 'never names operators' and that 'jt_fleet_search and jt_owner_fleet do return names.' This gives an agent a clear signal to choose this tool for aggregate statistics and the named siblings when individual operator identities are needed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources