Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mestre Prático • Brazil Retail & Commodities MCP

by io.github.arthursantosmedia-stack
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

brazil_supplements_anvisa_audit

Read-onlyIdempotent

Queries the official ANVISA and INCQS/Fiocruz laboratory audit of creatine and dietary supplements in Brazil (RDC No. 243/2018, 41 brands analyzed) and computes deterministic cost-per-dose (3g or custom) vs. in-natura beef parity. Returns official gov.br/anvisa and incqs.fiocruz.br verification links, purity compliance status, labeling status, manufacturer legal name, and exact mathematical cost per gram.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "brazil_supplements_anvisa_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marcaNoOptional brand name filter (e.g., 'atlhetica', 'soldiers', 'max titanium', 'growth', 'integralmedica', 'dux', 'probiotica', 'dark lab'). Leave empty to list all audited brands.
dose_diaria_gramasNoDaily creatine dose in grams for deterministic cost parity calculation vs. raw beef. Defaults to 3.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, and the description adds genuine context beyond them: it discloses the return payload (gov.br/incqs verification links, purity status, labeling status, manufacturer legal name) and that the cost math is deterministic. It does not mention result-count limits or freshness/last-updated, which for an audit dataset would be useful.

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?

It is front-loaded with the object of the query, which is good, but it is a single dense run-on sentence packing regulation number, brand count, dose mechanics, and a six-item return list. Information earns its place but would read better split into purpose and returns.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (links, purity status, labeling, manufacturer, cost per gram). What is missing is only minor: whether all 41 brands are returned by default and whether cost parity refers to a fixed beef price source.

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 fully documented, including example brands. The description only restates the 3g-or-custom dose concept and brand filtering, adding no syntax or semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Queries') plus a precisely named resource (ANVISA and INCQS/Fiocruz audit of creatine/supplements, RDC No. 243/2018) and adds a second concrete function (deterministic cost-per-dose vs. beef parity). Nothing overlaps with the sibling tools (pharma_medicines, grocery_basket, etc.).

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?

The brand filter and dose parameter imply how to use it, and the legal framing (RDC No. 243/2018 audits) hints at scope, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g., brazil_pharma_medicines) for agents choosing between tools.

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

All Mestre Prático • Brazil Retail & Commodities MCP 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