MPT AM e RR: Certidão Negativa de Feitos, consulta em fonte oficial. Hospedado pela plataforma, sem credenciais da plataforma, 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).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cpf | No | ||
| cnpj | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it mentions that the tool is paid via prepaid credits, requires no platform credentials, and that the data is not confidential. It also clarifies LGPD responsibilities, enhancing transparency about operational and legal aspects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is succinct and well-structured, starting with the core purpose and then providing supplementary details. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, with no unnecessary fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers key aspects: the source (official Brazilian bodies), cost model, data nature, and legal responsibilities. It does not specify output format or error handling, but given the absence of an output schema and the tool's straightforward nature, it is reasonably complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema only lists 'cpf' and 'cnpj' as strings without any descriptions. The tool description does not elaborate on these parameters, leaving their exact meaning and usage entirely to inference from context. No additional semantics are provided.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function: it consults official Brazilian sources for a 'Certidão Negativa de Feitos' (negative certificate). The verb 'consulta' and the specific resource are explicit, and the purpose is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool or how it compares to alternative tools. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred, leaving the usage context entirely unspecified.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.