show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Banco Central do Brasil (BCB): Valores a Receber
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no extra context about side effects or limitations, relying on the annotations. This meets the lower bar but does not go beyond.
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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is efficiently structured and directly conveys the tool's purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple version-query tool with no parameters or output schema, the description is complete. It fully communicates what the tool does without needing further context.
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 has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description provides no additional parameter information, but none is needed.
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 clearly states the tool's function: showing MCP platform and adapter versions. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools, which handle authentication, data querying, connectivity, marketplace, bug reporting, and toolkit info.
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 implies when to use (when needing version information) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Since no sibling tool serves a similar purpose, the guidance is adequate but not exhaustive.
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.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5
Most tools are generic platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) rather than domain-specific, and 'marketplace' explicitly mentions CPF queries which could be confused with the BCB consult tool. 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' also overlap in providing status information.
Naming Consistency2/5
The naming is highly inconsistent: most tools use English imperative verbs (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version) or nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), while the only domain-specific tool uses a Portuguese noun phrase with underscore format (bcb_valores_receber_consultar). No clear pattern across the set.
Tool Count2/5
Seven tools is not inherently excessive, but six of them are generic platform management features unrelated to the server's stated purpose of accessing BCB values. The count is inflated with irrelevant tools, making the server poorly scoped for its intended domain.
Completeness3/5
From a domain perspective, the single BCB consult tool covers the core need for checking 'valores a receber'. However, there is no option for related operations (e.g., scheduling, detailed reports), and the included generic tools do not contribute to domain completeness. Overall, the surface is minimal but not severely incomplete for a simple query.