Skip to main content
Glama

mcp-revenue-empire — Japan public-data ledgers

realestate_watch_verify_ledger

Verify the hash-chain integrity of a real-estate record (tamper detection). Returns chainValid, brokenAt (if any), checked event count, firstSeenAt and ledgerVerified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemIdYes

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It describes the operation as verification and lists return fields, indicating a read-only check. However, it does not explicitly state no side effects or mention any destructive potential, which is acceptable but could be more precise.

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 a single sentence that clearly states the action and lists return values. No redundant information; all text is purposeful.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, action, and return fields. It could add a note about read-only nature, but overall complete for its complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the record being verified, which implies itemId identifies the real-estate record. For a single parameter, this is adequate but could explicitly state the parameter's role.

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?

Description clearly states the tool verifies hash-chain integrity of a real-estate record for tamper detection. It specifies the resource (real-estate ledger) and the action (verify), differentiating it from sibling verify_ledger tools for other domains.

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 implies usage for tamper detection on real-estate records, but does not explicitly state when to use vs not use alternatives. Given the domain-specific name and clear purpose, context is sufficient, though no exclusions are listed.

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.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinguished by domain prefixes (e.g., bid_watch, grant_watch) and specific action verbs. However, the high number of similarly structured watch tools could still cause confusion, though descriptions clarify exact purposes.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a consistent `domain_subdomain_action` pattern with underscores, e.g., `agent_audit_query`, `bid_watch_search`. Even long names like `commerce_catalog_agent_readiness_score` adhere to this structure.

Tool Count2/5

With 147 tools, the server is far too broad, covering weather, carbon estimates, domain intel, and more—well beyond its stated 'Japan public-data ledgers' scope. This sheer volume overwhelms agents and dilutes focus.

Completeness3/5

The server offers many read-only tools for Japanese public data (bids, grants, licenses, etc.), but lacks create/update/delete operations for those domains. Additionally, numerous unrelated tools (e.g., carbon estimates, weather) feel tacked on, leaving gaps in core coverage.

Resources