Skip to main content
Glama

Astrea (Aurum)

by io.github.mcp-dir

astrea_processos_count

Read-onlyIdempotent

Processos (casos) no Astrea. Respostas COMPACTAS pra economizar contexto. Ações:

  • buscar: ACHA o processo pelo NÚMERO CNJ (ou trecho dele) e/ou por texto do título/cliente, devolvendo o id interno que as outras tools pedem (case_id). Mande TODOS os números de uma vez em numeros[] — a busca varre a conta UMA vez pra lista inteira (triagem de publicações: 30 números = 1 chamada). Por padrão inclui encerrados (status "All"), que é onde ficam execuções/recursos antigos. Resposta: encontrados[{consulta, processos[]}], nao_encontrados[], varredura{paginas, processos_varridos, truncado}. truncado=true significa que a varredura parou antes do fim (já achou tudo que foi pedido, ou bateu o teto) — pode haver outros processos casando um número PARCIAL.

  • list: UMA página de processos (não varre a conta toda). Filtros: contact_id, tag_id, status. Pagine com cursor (devolvido em cada resposta). Pra achar UM processo específico use buscar, não pagine list.

  • count: total de processos (mesmos filtros) rápido, use pra "quantos".

  • por_cliente: resumo por cliente (qtd + soma do valor da causa), ordenado. Use top_n pra limitar. Respeita o status. Sem o detalhe dos processos, pra detalhar chame list com contact_id.

  • novos_por_mes: nº de processos novos por mês (data de distribuição). Respeita o status. por_cliente e novos_por_mes varrem a conta e também devolvem varredura{paginas, processos_varridos, truncado, motivo}. truncado=true significa que o resultado é PARCIAL (motivo "tempo" = a conta é grande demais pra varrer inteira numa chamada; "teto_de_paginas" = passou de 5000 processos) — diga isso ao usuário em vez de apresentar o número como total do escritório, e use count pro total exato ou list com filtros pra recortar. Campos por processo (list): id, number, customer/customerId, title, court, lawsuitType, amount (valor da causa), convictionAmount (valor da condenação, só vem quando preenchido no Astrea), distribuitionDate, lastMovement, active (true=em andamento, false=encerrado), currentInstanceNumber (grau/instância), situacao (rótulo pronto, ex.: "Encerrado 1º Grau"), tagIds.

[Flattened action: count]

Bulk support: accepts contact_ids, tag_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
textoNo
top_nNo
cursorNo
statusNo
tag_idNo
numerosNo
tag_idsNo
contact_idNo
contact_idsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / numeros
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / status / default
      Removed value: -"Active"
    • addedInput schema / properties / texto
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "Active",
-  "Archived"
-]New value: +[
+  "Active",
+  "Inactive",
+  "Archived",
+  "All"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that responses are compact, that count is fast, and that bulk contact_ids/tag_ids are accepted. However, it does not disclose count-specific behavior such as default status handling or exact response format, so the added context is modest.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is very long and most of it documents actions that are not specific to a count-only tool. The '[Flattened action: count]' line is a signal that stale boilerplate was reused. Although the bullet structure helps readability, most sentences do not earn their place when the agent only needs to invoke astrea_processos_count.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The core idea of count ('total de processos (mesmos filtros) rápido') is present, but there is no output schema and the response format is never specified. Defaults, which filters apply, and which schema parameters should be ignored are left unclear. The description is further diluted by irrelevant action-level details, so it is not fully reliable for autonomous invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the parameter-semantics burden. It does explain contact_id, tag_id, and status via the list action and 'mesmos filtros', and it mentions bulk contact_ids/tag_ids. But the schema exposes 10 parameters, many of which (numeros, texto, cursor, top_n, limit) belong to other actions; the description never clarifies which parameters are actually valid or ignored for count, creating real ambiguity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens generically with 'Processos (casos) no Astrea' and enumerates five actions (buscar, list, count, por_cliente, novos_por_mes), so the actual scope of a tool named astrea_processos_count is ambiguous. The 'count' bullet is clear enough ('total de processos... rápido, use pra quantos'), but the appended '[Flattened action: count]' suggests the description is a leftover from a multi-action tool, making the true resource/operation less obvious.

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 explicit guidance: use count for 'quantos', use buscar to find a specific processo, and use list for pagination or detailed filtering. The truncation note also routes users to count for the exact total, which is strong when-to-use guidance even though it is embedded in a broader multi-action description.

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

All Astrea (Aurum) toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool groups share identical descriptions because they were flattened from parameterized actions (the five astrea_processos_* tools, astrea_agenda_global/por_cliente, and astrea_financeiro_despesas/honorarios). The names and [Flattened action] markers help, but an agent relying on descriptions can easily pick the wrong variant or think the tools are interchangeable.

Naming Consistency2/5

The astrea_ prefix gives some coherence, but the pattern is inconsistent: singular vs. plural objects (astrea_processo_criar vs. astrea_processos_list), verb-only names (astrea_encerrar), double-verb names (astrea_etiquetar_aplicar), and six unrelated English platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) mixed in. It is readable but not predictable enough for a reliable convention.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is well into the too-heavy range, especially because several of them are flattened actions that duplicate one another's descriptions and could have been single parameterized tools. The set is further bloated by platform-level tools like marketplace, authenticate, and connect that are unrelated to the Astrea legal domain.

Completeness3/5

The core process lifecycle is fairly well covered: create, edit, search, list, count, close, tag, and financial summaries exist. However, there are notable gaps: no task listing, no standalone client create/update/delete, no document list/delete, and no appointment update tool, which leaves several common workflows incomplete.

Resources