OmniaAuto — Canadian Vehicle Listings

Coverage

coverage

Read-only

COST: 1 credit per call.

Returns the number of distinct vehicles currently listed in Canada, the number of brands and the last update date.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`unit`	No	Always vehicle
`error`	No	Set on a refusal, e.g. out_of_credits, not_found; result fields are then absent
`brands`	No	Number of makes
`vehicles`	No	Distinct vehicles currently listed
`latest_update`	No	Date of the latest data update, YYYY-MM-DD
`credits_remaining`	No	Credits left in the current period

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "brands": {
+      "description": "Number of makes",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "credits_remaining": {
+      "description": "Credits left in the current period",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Set on a refusal, e.g. out_of_credits, not_found; result fields are then absent",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "latest_update": {
+      "description": "Date of the latest data update, YYYY-MM-DD",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "unit": {
+      "description": "Always vehicle",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "vehicles": {
+      "description": "Distinct vehicles currently listed",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the description's main contribution is the 'COST: 1 credit per call' disclosure — billing behavior that structured fields cannot express and that materially affects invocation frequency. It doesn't discuss rate limits or caching, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. Front-loading the credit cost is defensible because it is the most decision-relevant fact for a paid call, and the return-content sentence follows immediately.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value structure needn't be restated, and the description still summarizes the returned fields plus cost. For a zero-parameter read-only metric call this is essentially complete; only sibling differentiation is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this is a 4. There is nothing further the description could meaningfully clarify about inputs.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: it returns distinct vehicle counts, brand counts and a last-update date for Canada. An agent knows exactly what data comes back. It doesn't explicitly separate itself from the sibling market_stats, which sounds like an overlapping statistics endpoint, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance and no reference to alternatives, despite market_stats and my_usage sitting in the same family. The only decision-relevant cue is the credit cost, which informs cost/benefit but not tool selection.

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

All OmniaAuto — Canadian Vehicle Listings tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?