show_version
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds 'current' to indicate a live status but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy, ideal for a simple version-retrieval tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is trivial, has no parameters, and the annotations cover safety. The description sufficiently conveys what the agent needs to know to select and invoke it, given the 100% schema coverage and absence of output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool accepts zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies because no further compensation is needed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Show') and specifies the resource ('current MCP platform and adapter versions'), making its function unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like authenticate or marketplace, which focus on different concerns.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies that this tool is for retrieving version information but does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives. However, given its specialized purpose, the usage context is reasonably clear without needing exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The core query tool and platform utilities are distinct, but connect and toolkit_info both report connection status and could confuse an agent. The marketplace tool is multi-functional but clearly scoped. Overall, purposes are mostly separable.
Names mix English and Portuguese (authenticate vs. beneficiario_final_consultar) and use inconsistent patterns: verb (connect, authenticate), noun (marketplace), noun_noun (toolkit_info), and verb_noun (report_bug, show_version). The Portuguese tool reverses the typical verb_noun order.
Seven tools is within a reasonable range, but most are generic platform utilities unrelated to the server's stated purpose of beneficiary final queries. The core domain is served by a single tool, while the rest feel bolted on.
For the beneficiary final domain, the single query tool covers the basic use case, but there are no supporting operations like batch queries, history, or credit management. The platform tools are general but don't address domain-specific needs, leaving the surface incomplete for a dedicated compliance service.