show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
DETRAN MS Guia Flex: Multas
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it shows MCP platform and adapter versions but does not describe return format or any additional behavioral characteristics beyond what annotations convey.
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 concise sentence of nine words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. There is no unnecessary information or repetition.
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 zero-parameter, read-only version tool with no output schema, the description fully covers the purpose and scope. Annotations provide safety guarantees, so no additional context is needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.
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?
There are zero parameters, and the schema already covers this completely. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add anything about parameters since none exist.
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 states a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('current MCP platform and adapter versions'), making it obvious what the tool does. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like authenticate or marketplace, which serve very different functions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage when version information is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. For a trivial zero-parameter tool, this is acceptable but lacks explicit guidance.
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
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5
Each tool has a fairly clear role, but the boundaries blur around `authenticate`, `connect`, and `marketplace`: all three deal with credentials, connection status, and running platform tools. The single DETRAN query tool is unique, but an agent could hesitate between using it directly and using `marketplace` to invoke a similar paid/one-off tool.
Naming Consistency2/5
Naming conventions are mixed: the domain tool is a long Portuguese snake_case verb (`detran_ms_multas_flex_consultar`), while several Spanish/English short verbs (`authenticate`, `connect`, `marketplace`) and compound nouns (`toolkit_info`, `show_version`) are used. There is no consistent verb_noun or naming pattern across the set.
Tool Count3/5
Seven tools is not an unreasonable number, but six are generic platform and housekeeping operations rather than DETRAN-focused functionality. For a server advertised as a DETRAN MS fine tool, the set is heavily weighted away from the domain and feels imbalanced.
Completeness3/5
The only actual DETRAN capability is a single `consultar` operation, which may handle basic fine consultation but leaves no room for related domain needs such as vehicle/plate context, fine details, or payment/preparation flows. The `marketplace` tool is an escape hatch to external tools, not a coherent native DETRAN domain surface.