Skip to main content
Glama

iscabox

by com.iscabox

Iscas recomendadas por espécie

get_lures_for_species
Read-onlyIdempotent

As iscas certas para um peixe específico, com o motivo de cada uma: a lista curada da página "melhores iscas artificiais para X" da iscabox e, para peixes sem essa página, as iscas (artificiais e naturais) que o guia da espécie recomenda. Use SEMPRE que a pergunta for "que isca para ", em vez de search_equipment: o catálogo de iscas não sabe para que peixe cada isca serve. Aceita nome de família ("robalo" cobre peva e flecha). Retorna preços ao vivo.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
speciesYesNome ou slug do peixe. Ex: "robalo", "tucunaré", "tilapia".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context: the data source, the fallback from curated lists to species guide recommendations, acceptance of family names, and that live prices are returned. This goes beyond the 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 compact but information-dense, front-loaded with what the tool does and followed by clear usage guidance. Every sentence contributes: purpose, source/fallback behavior, when to use over the sibling, family-name handling, and output detail.

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?

For a simple one-parameter lookup tool with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is complete. It explains what is returned, where the data comes from, how to route the query, and what edge cases are handled, leaving no significant gap for the agent.

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% and the schema already describes the species parameter with examples. The description adds extra semantic value by explaining that family names are accepted and that 'robalo' covers 'peva' and 'flecha', which is not present in the schema.

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 states that the tool returns the right lures for a specific fish, with the reason for each lure, and explicitly contrasts it with search_equipment. This gives a clear verb, resource, and enough detail to distinguish it from siblings.

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?

It explicitly instructs to use this tool whenever the question is 'what lure for <fish>' and says to use it instead of search_equipment, with a reason why. It also covers family-name handling, so an agent knows when a broader query is acceptable.

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

All iscabox 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a clear resource-action pair: search_* finds entities, get_* retrieves details, and build_tralha composes a full kit. The explicit cross-reference in get_lures_for_species and build_tralha prevents overlap with search_equipment.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: search_ for queries, get_ for details, and build_ for the one assembly action. The Portuguese term 'tralha' is domain-specific but does not break the pattern.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each one earns its place across species, equipment, locations, techniques, conditions, and kit assembly. The count feels intentionally scoped for a fishing assistant without bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full discovery-to-recommendation journey: search species/equipment/locations/techniques, get detailed information, check fishing conditions, and assemble a complete rig. Domain-specific needs like lure-to-species mapping and river routes are also covered, leaving no obvious dead ends.

Resources