Onça Setorial

Mining dam safety per company (ANM SIGBM)

dam_safety

Read-onlyIdempotent

Tailings-dam safety per mining company from ANM's SIGBM register: number of dams, dams at an emergency level or at alert, high risk category (CRI) and high associated potential damage (DPA), and the worst emergency level. Use for 'which mining companies have dams in emergency'. Worst first. Needs the mining sector licensed. Deterministic: computed from official datasets, no model in the loop.

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": "dam_safety"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity`	No	Optional. One company by name, e.g. 'Vale'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description adds genuinely new operational context: a licensing gate the caller must satisfy, a deterministic no-model provenance claim, and a defined sort order. It also implicitly signals that omitting the entity parameter yields a ranked multi-company view, which matters for a tool with no output schema.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the opening clause, then the metric list, the use case, the ordering, the prerequisite, and the provenance note follow in a tight sequence. The colon-delimited metric enumeration is dense but each item carries retrieval meaning rather than filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description bears the burden of describing results, and it does so by naming every returned measure plus the sort order. The remaining gap is edge behavior (unknown company name, partial coverage), which is minor for a read-only aggregate tool.

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?

The single optional 'entity' parameter is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'per mining company' hints at the aggregation scope but adds no naming, matching, or fallback semantics beyond what the schema already says.

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?

The description gives an exact verb+resource framing: tailings-dam safety metrics per mining company sourced from ANM's SIGBM register, and it enumerates the returned measures (dam count, emergency/alert counts, high CRI, high DPA, worst emergency level). The domain is distinctive enough that an agent can distinguish it from the sibling tools (financials, airline punctuality, enforcement) without opening any schema.

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?

It states a concrete question this answers ('which mining companies have dams in emergency'), the ordering ('Worst first'), and a hard prerequisite ('Needs the mining sector licensed'). There is no explicit when-not or named alternative, which keeps it short of a 5.

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

All Onça Setorial tools Inspect

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

Need Help?