Skip to main content
Glama

Prefeitura BA Juazeiro: Certidão Negativa de Débitos

pref_ba_juazeiro_cnd_consultar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Prefeitura BA Juazeiro: Certidão Negativa de Débitos, 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).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cpfNo
cnpjNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: it mentions the query is hosted by the platform, requires no credentials, involves prepaid credit, accesses official Brazilian sources, and clarifies data is not confidential. It also addresses LGPD compliance. It does not contradict any annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is moderately concise but has redundant information (e.g., 'consulta em fonte oficial' is repeated conceptually later). It could be streamlined, but it is not excessively long.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., the content of the certificate, success/failure indications, or any error conditions). It also omits details about parameter handling or edge cases, making it incomplete for a user.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema lists cpf and cnpj without any descriptions, and the description does not mention these parameters at all. It fails to explain what they represent, which one is required, or their format. Given zero schema coverage, the description should have compensated but did not.

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 queries a negative debt certificate (Certidão Negativa de Débitos) from an official source, specifying the municipality (Juazeiro/BA). It distinguishes itself from generic sibling tools like authenticate or connect by focusing on this specific query.

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?

It provides implicit usage context, such as being a paid query (crédito pré-pago) and requiring no platform credentials. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when not to use it, but the specificity makes the intended use clear.

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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have unclear boundaries: connect and toolkit_info both describe connection/status information, and marketplace is a catch-all that can invoke one-off tools, complicating the distinction from the direct CND consultation tool. The only clearly unique domain tool is pref_ba_juazeiro_cnd_consultar, but the generic helpers overlap with each other.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix bare verbs like connect and report_bug with noun-style names like marketplace and toolkit_info, and the Portuguese-specific pref_ba_juazeiro_cnd_consultar follows a different convention. There is no consistent verb_noun or domain pattern across the set.

Tool Count3/5

Seven tools is a reasonable count for a platform-support surface, so the size is not inherently bloated. However, only one tool directly serves the apparent CND-focused purpose, with the rest being generic platform/management helpers, creating a borderline scope mismatch.

Completeness4/5

The CND domain is essentially a single consult operation, and pref_ba_juazeiro_cnd_consultar covers that core workflow. The supporting tools provide enough auth/connection and error-reporting coverage, though a dedicated provider-specific workflow beyond that would be clearer.