Skip to main content
Glama

Servidores Federais Completa (Transparência)

report_bug

Idempotent

Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNo
messageYes
conversationNo[]

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. The description adds context about needing the conversation array for reproduction, but does not disclose additional side effects, authentication needs, or output behavior, which is a minor gap.

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 that conveys the core purpose and a key usage instruction without any wasted words.

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?

With no output schema and 3 parameters (one required), the description is too terse. It omits the meaning of the required 'message' field, the optional 'context', and any return value or confirmation behavior, leaving the agent without full operational context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains the 'conversation' parameter (as the 'conversation array') but leaves the required 'message' and optional 'context' parameters undefined, offering insufficient guidance for an agent.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Report') and resources ('bug, missing feature, or feedback'), which distinctly separates it from sibling tools like authenticate, connect, and 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 clearly implies when to use the tool (when reporting bugs/feedback) and adds a concrete instruction to include the conversation array for reproduction. It lacks explicit exclusions or named alternatives, but those are not necessary given the distinct purpose.

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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping responsibilities: 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' both return connection/status info, 'authenticate' handles session/auth concerns, and 'marketplace' bundles numerous actions (including install, subscribe, cancel, report_bug) that duplicate capabilities of 'report_bug' and other tools. Agents would struggle to choose the right tool without examining internal action parameters.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names follow no consistent pattern: some are bare verbs ('authenticate', 'connect'), some are verb_noun ('report_bug', 'show_version'), one is a noun ('marketplace'), and the domain-specific tool uses a long Portuguese composite ('transparencia_servidores_completa_consultar'). The mix of English platform verbs and a Portuguese domain name adds inconsistency.

Tool Count3/5

Seven tools is within an acceptable range, but the 'marketplace' tool is a monolithic catch-all containing search, describe, invoke, install, list, subscribe, cancel, report_bug, request_mcp, and prompt management, effectively representing 12+ operations under one tool. This makes the actual surface area much larger than the count suggests, though the number itself is reasonable.

Completeness2/5

The server's stated purpose is federal employee transparency, but only a single CPF query tool is provided, with no listing, filtering, or batch operations. The platform admin tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) are comprehensive, but they don't cover the transparency domain, which appears to be the server's primary focus. Many common transparency needs remain unsupported.