report_bug
Idempotent
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Tribunal TRT14: Consulta Processual
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive traits. The description adds useful context about including conversation messages for reproduction, but it does not disclose what happens after submission (e.g., ticket creation or external notification).
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?
Two concise sentences; the first states the purpose and the second adds the key usage instruction. No filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple and annotations cover safety traits, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits semantics for the context parameter and gives a conversation type that conflicts with the schema, leaving some ambiguity for a 3-parameter tool.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description must clarify parameters, but it only addresses conversation and labels it an 'array' while the schema declares type string. The 'context' parameter is left unexplained, and 'message' is only implied by the tool purpose.
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 names a specific verb ('Report') and resource types ('a bug, missing feature, or feedback'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like authenticate, connect, or 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 first clause establishes when to use the tool (bug, missing feature, feedback), providing clear context. It does not name alternatives or exclusion scenarios, but no closely related sibling exists.
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: authentication, connection status, marketplace operations, bug reporting, version info, toolkit state, and a specific court query tool. However, 'connect' and 'authenticate' have some overlap in managing connection state, and 'toolkit_info' could be confused with marketplace's 'list_tools' for checking installed tools.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tool names are a mix of single verbs (connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version) and noun-based names (toolkit_info), with one snake_case full description (tribunal_trt14_processo_consultar). The server-related tools are inconsistent in style, and the domain-specific tool follows a different convention.
Tool Count4/5
Seven tools is an appropriate number for a server that offers both platform-level functionality (auth, version, bug reporting, toolkit info) and a specific domain-specific query tool (tribunal query). It is slightly on the higher side for such a narrow purpose, but each tool has a clear role.
Completeness4/5
The server covers the core needs: authentication, connectivity, marketplace discovery/execution, bug feedback, version checking, and a single legal query tool. Missing are operations like managing previous queries, handling billing details (beyond what marketplace does), or other tribunal-specific endpoints, but the main workflow is complete.