show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
SINTEGRA: RO
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond this, but it does not contradict the annotations and the simple read-only nature is apparent.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes directly to explaining what the tool does.
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?
For a simple, zero-parameter, read-only version query, the description is complete. The return value is reasonably implied by 'show versions', and the annotations sufficiently cover safety behavior, so no additional context is necessary.
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 baseline is 4. The description has no parameter details to provide, and none are needed given the empty input schema.
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?
Description uses a specific verb ('Show') and clearly identifies the resource ('current MCP platform and adapter versions'). It is distinguishable from siblings like authenticate, connect, and report_bug, and aligns with the tool's name without merely restating it.
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 makes the usage context obvious: use this tool to retrieve current platform and adapter versions. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a zero-parameter version tool the context is clear enough.
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
B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation1/5
The purpose of each tool is not clearly distinct: 'authenticate', 'connect', and 'marketplace' all deal with connection/authentication aspects, and 'authenticate' and 'marketplace' both involve token/credential handling. 'marketplace' also includes a prompt library, blurring boundaries with a hypothetical prompt tool, and 'connect' overlaps with 'toolkit_info' in reporting connection status. This creates high ambiguity for an agent selecting the right tool.
Naming Consistency3/5
Most tool names are verbs in imperative form (authenticate, connect, show_version, report_bug), but there is a mix: 'marketplace' is a noun, 'toolkit_info' uses a noun+noun structure, and 'sintegra_ro_consultar' breaks the English pattern with Portuguese. While many follow a simple verb, the lack of a consistent verb_noun pattern and the Portuguese exception reduce consistency.
Tool Count4/5
With 7 tools, the count is within the typical recommended range and each tool appears to serve a distinct functional area (auth, connectivity, catalog, feedback, version, a domain-specific query, and toolkit info). However, some tools have overlapping responsibilities, making the count feel slightly bloated; a more consolidated design could reduce it without major loss.
Completeness2/5
The server appears to focus on a Brazilian tax query (SINTEGRA RO) but only has a single query tool, lacking operations for managing query history, reporting results, or handling errors in a structured way. The platform-level tools are generic but cover market/installation, yet there is no explicit tool for managing credentials beyond 'authenticate' and 'connect', which may leave gaps for full lifecycle management.