Lista pedidos de venda (GET /pedidos/vendas). Paginado. Filtros opcionais: dataInicial/dataFinal (AAAA-MM-DD), idContato, numero.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limite | No | ||
| numero | No | ||
| pagina | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| dataFinal | No | ||
| idContato | No | ||
| dataInicial | No |
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=true and idempotentHint=true, making the behavior clear. The description adds the endpoint method (GET) which aligns, but does not disclose additional traits like default pagination, sorting, or error behavior.
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, concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose and quickly covers pagination and filters. No unnecessary words, though the structure uses periods within the sentence.
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?
Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It fails to document three parameters (pagina, limite, account) and offers no usage context. Annotations help, but the description remains incomplete for effective tool selection.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining 4 of 7 parameters (dataInicial, dataFinal with date format, idContato, numero). However, it omits pagina, limite, and account, leaving gaps.
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 clearly states the tool lists sales orders (pedidos de venda) via the GET endpoint. The resource is distinct from sibling tools like bling_list_produtos, though no explicit differentiation is provided.
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 mentions pagination and optional filters but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for single order retrieval bling_get_pedido_venda). No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get/list for specific Bling entities (contacts, NFEs, sales orders, products, etc.) and separate platform tools (authenticate, marketplace, etc.). No overlapping functionality.
Bling tools follow a consistent 'bling_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., bling_get_contato, bling_list_produtos), while platform tools use simple English names (authenticate, marketplace). The deviation is minor and explainable by the two distinct categories.
22 tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range for a single server, but the number is justified by the comprehensive coverage of Bling entities and additional platform utilities. Not excessive.
The Bling tools are read-only (list/get only), lacking any create, update, or delete operations. This is a significant gap for a business management integration, limiting the agent's ability to perform full data lifecycle operations.