Skip to main content
Glama

Conta Simples

by io.github.mcp-dir

contasimples_bill

Read-onlyIdempotent

Faturas do cartão de crédito (valores em BRL). Sem due_date: lista as faturas (filtro status opcional), cada uma com total (totalAmount) e quanto falta pagar (amountToPay), datas de corte/vencimento e paymentStatus. Com due_date (YYYY-MM-DD): retorna os totalizadores + os itens (transações) daquela fatura. Observação: a Conta Simples não expõe um campo de "limite disponível" do cartão via API; a fatura mostra o valor em aberto/a pagar, não o limite. Opcional: accounts — agrega N empresas em paralelo (accounts[] + errors[]).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNo
accountsNo
due_dateNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, which the description aligns with. Additionally, it discloses the aggregation behavior (accounts[] + errors[]) and the limitation about available limit, adding value beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with line breaks and front-loads purpose. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Could be more concise by omitting explanatory notes about Conta Simples API limitations, but those add useful context.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers both modes and explains return fields (total, amountToPay, dates, paymentStatus, items). It also addresses the missing limit field explicitly. Without output schema, it gives enough information to understand the tool's output. Slightly incomplete regarding pagination or error handling.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully explains parameters: due_date changes mode, status is optional filter, accounts enables parallel aggregation. Though status enum values are not listed, the description provides sufficient context for usage.

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 it's about credit card invoices (faturas do cartão de crédito) and distinguishes two modes: listing invoices and retrieving details with due_date. It differentiates from sibling tools like contasimples_balance and contasimples_card.

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 explains when to use each mode (without due_date for listing, with due_date for details) and mentions that it doesn't expose available limit, implying not to use for limits. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to other tools or provide exclusionary guidance.

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

All Conta Simples 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Almost all tools have clear purposes, especially with the contasimples_ prefix. Some overlap between statement and summary, but descriptions differentiate well. The general tools (marketplace, report_bug, etc.) are completely different from the financial ones, which reduces potential confusion.

Naming Consistency3/5

The domain tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., contasimples_card_write_block). However, the inclusion of general tools like authenticate, connect, marketplace breaks the pattern. This inconsistency lowers the score.

Tool Count4/5

With 24 tools covering authentication, financial operations, and platform utilities, the number is reasonable for a moderately complex MCP server. It doesn't feel excessive or too thin.

Completeness3/5

The toolset covers key financial operations (balance, bills, cards, statements, summary) and some mutations (block/unblock, create invite, delete user). However, missing CRUD for several entities (e.g., no update user, no create card, no delete invite) leaves gaps. The presence of platform utilities adds breadth but not depth.

Resources