Skip to main content
Glama

MP Mato Grosso (Procedimentos)

by io.github.mcp-dir

mpmt_procedimentos_consultar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Consulta procedimentos investigatórios extrajudiciais do Ministério Público de Mato Grosso para uma pessoa ou empresa a partir do CPF ou CNPJ. Hospedado pela plataforma, sem credenciais, pague por consulta com crédito pré-pago. Consulta informação de ACESSO PÚBLICO em bases e fontes oficiais (a mesma disponível ao cidadão), não é dado privado nem sigiloso. O cliente é o controlador dos dados e responde pela finalidade legítima (LGPD).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
CpfYes
CnpjYes
completoNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description adds valuable behavioral context: no credentials required, payment model, the public nature of the data, and LGPD compliance responsibilities. This helps the agent understand the operational and legal constraints without contradicting the annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the main purpose stated first. Each sentence adds meaningful information (access, payment, data nature, legal responsibility) without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 the data source, public access, payment, and legal considerations, providing solid context for an agent to decide when to use it. However, given no output schema, it does not describe the return format or content, leaving some uncertainty about what the tool actually returns.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that Cpf/Cnpj are used to query for a person or company, but does not clarify the 'completo' boolean parameter or the fact that the schema requires both Cpf and Cnpj despite the text suggesting 'ou' (or). Partial compensation, missing key 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 a specific action ('Consulta') on a specific resource ('procedimentos investigatórios extrajudiciais do Ministério Público de Mato Grosso') for a person or company using CPF or CNPJ. It effectively distinguishes itself from the unrelated sibling tools like authenticate or marketplace.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool: hosted on the platform, no credentials needed, pay-per-query with prepaid credit, and it queries public-access information. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the context is sufficient given no similar sibling tools exist.

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

All MP Mato Grosso (Procedimentos) 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes: connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, and authenticate also deals with credentials. The marketplace tool is a catch-all for many actions (search, describe, invoke, install, subscribe, etc.), making it hard to predict what it does from its name alone. The domain-specific tool (mpmt_procedimentos_consultar) is distinct, but the platform tools blur together.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is inconsistent across the set: verb_noun (show_version, report_bug), bare verbs (connect, authenticate), nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and a Portuguese phrase (mpmt_procedimentos_consultar). There is no coherent pattern in style or language, making the tool names feel ad hoc.

Tool Count3/5

At 7 tools, the count is within a reasonable range, but one tool (marketplace) is overloaded with dozens of sub-actions, making the real surface much larger and harder to grasp. The server mixes platform administration tools with a single domain operation, which feels unbalanced for its stated focus on procedures.

Completeness3/5

For the domain of consulting public ministry procedures, the single consultation tool is functional but minimal—there are no related operations like history, PDF export, or batch queries. The platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace) cover administration broadly, but the overall purpose of the server is unclear, making it hard to assess whether gaps exist.

Resources