Skip to main content
Glama

pontofato

by com.pontofato
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

contact

Fale com quem faz o produto: dúvida, ou proposta de patrocínio/parceria/anúncio. Grátis, sem captcha nem pagamento; uma mensagem a cada 10 s por rede (a que chega antes espera a vez). Uma rota para dúvida e para proposta de patrocínio, parceria ou anúncio (tipo, com os espaços de GET /api/partners). Sem captcha, sem conta, sem pagamento. Uma mensagem a cada 10 segundos por rede: a que chega antes espera a vez e sai — sem erro. A mensagem chega à equipe por e-mail, com o email como endereço de resposta.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesComo chamar quem escreve (alias `nome`).
siteNoSite de quem propõe.
tipoNoProposta: `patrocinio`, `parceria` ou `anuncio`. Liga os campos abaixo.
emailYesPara onde responder.
espacoNoIds de placement de `GET /api/partners`, até 6.
duracaoNoDias de exposição: `30`, `90` ou `365`.
empresaNoQuem propõe, quando é empresa.
messageYesO que você quer dizer (alias `mensagem`).
orcamentoNo`ate_100`, `100_500`, `500_2000`, `2000_mais` ou `a_combinar`.
pagamentoNo`usdc`, `deposito` ou `a_combinar`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"E-mail de resposta."New value: +"Para onde responder."
    • changedInput schema / properties / message / description
      Previous value: -"Mensagem (alias `mensagem`)."New value: +"O que você quer dizer (alias `mensagem`)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Nome (alias `nome`)."New value: +"Como chamar quem escreve (alias `nome`)."
  2. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / duracao
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Dias de exposição: `30`, `90` ou `365`.",
+  "enum": [
+    "30",
+    "90",
+    "365"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / empresa
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Quem propõe, quando é empresa.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / espaco
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ids de placement de `GET /api/partners`, até 6.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / orcamento
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "`ate_100`, `100_500`, `500_2000`, `2000_mais` ou `a_combinar`.",
+  "enum": [
+    "ate_100",
+    "100_500",
+    "500_2000",
+    "2000_mais",
+    "a_combinar"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / pagamento
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "`usdc`, `deposito` ou `a_combinar`.",
+  "enum": [
+    "usdc",
+    "deposito",
+    "a_combinar"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / site
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Site de quem propõe.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tipo
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Proposta: `patrocinio`, `parceria` ou `anuncio`. Liga os campos abaixo.",
+  "enum": [
+    "patrocinio",
+    "parceria",
+    "anuncio"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Added value: +"E-mail de resposta."
    • addedInput schema / properties / message / description
      Added value: +"Mensagem (alias `mensagem`)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Nome (alias `nome`)."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses meaningful behavioral traits: free, no captcha, no payment, no account, a 10-second rate limit per network with a queuing mechanism ('a que chega antes espera a vez e sai — sem erro'), and email delivery with the `email` field as reply-to. This goes beyond basic safety and gives the agent a realistic model of constraints and side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, but it repeats the same facts twice: 'Grátis, sem captcha nem pagamento' is later restated as 'Sem captcha, sem conta, sem pagamento', and the rate-limit sentence appears twice in slightly different wording. This redundancy means not every sentence earns its place, though the overall flow is clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 10-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, rate limits, queueing, and email delivery, but it leaves a gap: it does not explain which parameters are relevant only for proposals (e.g., `tipo`, `espaco`, `orcamento`, `pagamento`) versus a simple question. An agent might populate proposal-specific fields for a question or fail to include them for a proposal.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds useful semantic guidance: it ties `tipo` to the question-vs-proposal routing and tells the agent that `espaco` values come from `GET /api/partners`. This helps the agent populate those parameters correctly beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 action ('Fale com quem faz o produto' – talk to the product team) and the two specific use cases: questions and sponsorship/partnership/ad proposals. It is specific about the resource and purpose, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like chat_send or post_comment, so it misses the explicit sibling routing that would earn 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context on when to use the tool: for questions or sponsorship/partnership/ad proposals, and it even distinguishes two routes via the `tipo` parameter. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the use cases are clearly scoped, which is sufficient for an agent to select it appropriately.

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

All pontofato toolsInspect
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