Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

radar-cnpj

by com.radar-cnpj
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Add watch

add_watch

Starts watching a CNPJ. The first one is free; each extra slot is paid per 30 days, with no automatic renewal (the price is in x-price-usd and in /api/pricing). The service repeats the checks and detects changes, so the agent does not need to keep polling. Coverage follows the available sources and active slots. Read the monitoring and alert state.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cnpjYesCNPJ to watch, without punctuation: 14 digits or the alphanumeric one.
creditoYesGlobal prepaid credit token (cred_…), issued by POST /api/credito.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cnpj / description
      Previous value: -"CNPJ a monitorar, 14 dígitos."New value: +"CNPJ a monitorar, 14 dígitos ou o alfanumérico."
  4. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cnpj / description
      Previous value: -"CNPJ a acompanhar, 14 dígitos sem pontuação."New value: +"CNPJ a monitorar, 14 dígitos."
    • addedInput schema / properties / credito
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Token do crédito global (cred_…), de POST /api/credito.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / session_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "session_id",
-  "cnpj"
-]New value: +[
+  "credito",
+  "cnpj"
+]
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cnpj / description
      Added value: +"CNPJ a acompanhar, 14 dígitos sem pontuação."
  6. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: first watch is free, extra slots are paid per 30 days, there is no automatic renewal, and the service performs repeated checks and change detection.

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 mostly front-loaded and efficient, covering purpose, pricing, renewal, and polling behavior. The final sentence, "Read the monitoring and alert state," is somewhat vague and less clearly earned than the rest.

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?

For a non-destructive mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key operational context: cost, renewal, polling, and coverage. It could be more complete by clarifying duplicate-watch behavior or what state is returned, but it is largely sufficient.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add meaningful syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Starts watching a CNPJ." It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as list_watches or reactivate_watches.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: start monitoring a CNPJ, and the service will repeat checks so the agent need not poll. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_watches, reactivate_watches, or other monitoring-related siblings, and no when-not-to-use conditions.

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

All radar-cnpj 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