Skip to main content
Glama

Situação da governança

get_housekeeping_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Status de limpeza de cada habitação (limpa, suja, em limpeza, inspecionada, fora de operação) e último registro de governança.

Escopo: operations:read · Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum.

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": "get_housekeeping_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds useful detail by enumerating the cleaning-status values and mentioning the last governance record. It does not describe response structure or pagination, but for a zero-parameter read tool with rich annotations this is reasonably transparent.

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 two compact sentences, front-loads the returned data, and then provides scope/risk metadata. There is no wasted prose, and the structure makes the core purpose immediately clear.

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 simple, zero-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description gives enough context to understand what is returned. It could be slightly more complete about the 'last governance record' fields, but the essential behavior is covered.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and nothing in the description misrepresents the empty input schema.

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 that the tool returns each property's cleaning status and the latest governance record, and it enumerates the possible cleaning states. It is specific enough to distinguish a read-only status lookup from the mutation-oriented sibling update_housekeeping_status, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The scope line ('operations:read') indicates permissions rather than usage context, and the sibling update_housekeeping_status is not referenced.

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.