show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
PETI (Trabalho Infantil)
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds specific behavioral context by clarifying that it shows both platform and adapter versions, which goes beyond the generic 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 a single sentence containing only the essential information: what the tool shows and for which components. No filler, perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.
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?
Given that the tool has no parameters, rich annotations, and a simple purpose, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what to expect: current versions of the platform and adapters. No output schema is needed because the return value is self-explanatory for a version utility.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete at 100% coverage. The description need not explain parameters. Baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and no additional information is necessary.
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 verb and resource: 'Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like authenticate, connect, and report_bug by focusing solely on version display. No ambiguity or tautology.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the tool's purpose is obvious and self-explanatory for version checking. It is implied that this is the tool to use when needing version information, but no direct comparison with sibling tools or exclusions are 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
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have distinct purposes: authenticate handles login, connect shows connection status, marketplace finds/runs MCPs, peti_trabalho_infantil_consultar queries PETI data, etc. However, connect and toolkit_info overlap in reporting connection status, which could cause minor confusion.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tool names mix styles: some are simple verbs (connect, authenticate), some are verb_noun (report_bug, show_version), one is a hyphenated branded name (peti_trabalho_infantil_consultar), and one is a pure noun (marketplace). The pattern is not uniform, though still readable.
Tool Count4/5
With 7 tools, the count is reasonable and within typical bounds. However, the server is branded as 'PETI (Trabalho Infantil)' yet only one tool directly relates to that domain, making the platform tools feel slightly excessive for the apparent purpose.
Completeness3/5
For the sole PETI-specific purpose, consulting a person's status by CPF/NIS is covered, but there are no additional operations like historical queries or batch checks. The platform management tools are comprehensive, but they are unrelated to the core domain, creating a sense of patchwork coverage.