Skip to main content
Glama

JUCESP: Lista de Documentos

by io.github.mcp-dir

jucesp_documentos_consultar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lista os documentos arquivados de uma empresa na JUCESP a partir do NIRE. Hospedado pela plataforma, sem credenciais, 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).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nireYes
login_cpfNo
login_senhaNo
pkcs12_certNo
pkcs12_passNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description discloses payment requirements, authentication via credentials, the non-confidential nature of the data, and LGPD compliance, adding meaningful behavioral transparency.

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 concise, starting with the primary function and then adding necessary context. It is not overly verbose and maintains a clear logical flow.

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

Completeness2/5

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

While the basic purpose is clear, the description lacks details about the output format, expected behavior, and the role of each parameter. Without an output schema, this missing information leaves the tool incomplete for a user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only the 'nire' parameter is mentioned in the description. The authentication parameters (login_cpf, login_senha, pkcs12_cert, pkcs12_pass) are not explained, leaving their purpose and format unclear.

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 action: listing archived documents of a company in JUCESP based on NIRE. It also mentions hosting, payment, and data source, making it specific and distinct from generic sibling tools.

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 gives context (JUCESP, NIRE, payment) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. The need for NIRE and the company context is implicit, but no comparative guidance is provided.

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

All JUCESP: Lista de Documentos 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The single JUCESP query tool is clearly distinct from the meta/platform tools. The main ambiguity is only between authenticate and connect, but their descriptions define different responsibilities (credential acquisition vs. connection status reporting).

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is noticeably mixed: bare verbs (authenticate, connect), snake_case verb+noun forms (report_bug, show_version), noun-only names (marketplace, toolkit_info), and a Portuguese language domain-specific tool (jucesp_documentos_consultar). No unified convention is maintained.

Tool Count3/5

Seven tools is a manageable count, but most of them are generic platform support tools (marketplace, report_bug, show_version) rather than JUCESP domain tools. The server feels functionally thin for a domain-capable MCP, even though it does not have a bloat problem.

Completeness2/5

The server exposes only a single domain operation for querying archived JUCESP documents, with no filtering, detail view, pagination, download, or lifecycle tools. Beyond that one query, the remaining tools cover infrastructure rather than the stated JUCESP use-case, so the domain surface is quite incomplete.

Resources