Cadastur: Prestadores, consulta em fonte oficial. Hospedado pela plataforma, sem credenciais da plataforma, pague por consulta com crédito pré-pago. Consulta informação de fontes e órgãos oficiais brasileiros (a mesma disponível ao cidadão), não é dado sigiloso. O cliente é o controlador dos dados e responde pela finalidade legítima (LGPD).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uf | Yes | ||
| cnpj | Yes |
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?
The description discloses several behavioral aspects beyond the annotations, such as the requirement for prepaid credits, the fact that the data is not confidential, and the legal responsibility under LGPD. It also confirms the read-only nature implicitly through the term 'consulta'.
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 somewhat verbose and repetitive, with similar phrases about official sources appearing twice. It also includes legal jargon (LGPD) that may not be essential for explaining the tool's function. However, it is not excessively long and covers key points.
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 description does not explain the expected output or any error conditions, nor does it specify how the parameters should be used together (e.g., whether both are always required or if one alone is sufficient). It also lacks information about the response structure or potential limitations, making it incomplete for a comprehensive understanding.
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 description provides no explanation of the parameter meanings or formats. The schema lists 'uf' and 'cnpj' with only their types and required status, but the description does not clarify that 'uf' likely refers to a Brazilian state code and 'cnpj' to a company registration number, nor does it explain any combination rules or input constraints.
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 that this tool consults official Brazilian sources for Cadastur provider data. It distinguishes itself from other tools by specifying the domain (Cadastur) and the nature of the operation (query/consultation).
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 that it requires prepaid credits and operates without platform credentials, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for verifying provider registration status or when official data is needed). No clear usage conditions 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.