show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
ECRVSP Documentos: Opções de Placa
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the word 'current,' which implies live queries. It does not mention return format, network calls, or other behavioral aspects.
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?
One short sentence of 9 words, front-loaded and free of fluff.
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 no-parameter version tool, the description sufficiently explains the output and purpose. Annotations cover safety, and no output schema exists, requiring the description to indicate return values, which it does.
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?
No parameters exist, so the schema covers 100% of parameters. With 0 params, the baseline is 4; the description need not explain any parameter semantics.
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 the tool's function with a specific verb ('show') and resource (MCP platform and adapter versions). It distinguishes from siblings like authenticate or report_bug, which serve different purposes.
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 for checking version information, but does not explicitly compare against siblings like toolkit_info, which may provide similar info. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.
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
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but `connect` and `toolkit_info` both report connection/status information, and `authenticate` overlaps with `connect` around credentials, creating potential user confusion.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names are inconsistent in pattern: single-word verbs (authenticate, connect), a noun (marketplace), and snake_case compounds with differing grammatical structures (report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info, ecrvsp_docs_opcoes_placa_consultar). There is no uniform verb_noun or consistent naming style.
Tool Count3/5
The 7-tool count is within the typical acceptable range, but the server's stated domain (ECRVSP plate options) is served by only one tool, while the other six are generic platform utilities, making the set feel overpopulated with unrelated functionality.
Completeness3/5
The core domain exposes only a single consult operation (ecrvsp_docs_opcoes_placa_consultar) with no listing, status, or history operations, leaving notable gaps for any workflow beyond a basic query. Platform tools are more complete, but the domain surface is thin.