Skip to main content
Glama

Ca Dmv Forms

ca_dmv_forms
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the official California DMV forms catalog by topic and get each form's name, its REG/DL/BOAT form number, and the page to download it from. Answers "which California DMV form transfers a title", "CA DMV form for a duplicate registration", "form to report the sale of a vehicle", or a lookup by number like "REG 227". Results follow the DMV site's own relevance ranking, so a broad phrase can surface a vessel form alongside the vehicle one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax forms to return (default 10, max 50).
queryYesWhat the form is for, e.g. "title transfer", "duplicate registration", "change of address", or a form number like "REG 227".

Schema Changelog

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

  1. 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, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. Description adds that results follow the DMV site's own relevance ranking, providing extra context without contradiction.

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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with the main action, and includes relevant examples. Every sentence adds value.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what is returned (name, form number, download page). It also mentions relevance ranking and provides example use cases.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. Description adds examples and clarifies the query parameter, but does not significantly extend beyond schema descriptions.

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 specifies 'Search the official California DMV forms catalog by topic and get each form's name, its REG/DL/BOAT form number, and the page to download it from.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like ca_dmv_driver_licenses and ca_dmv_vehicle_registrations by focusing on forms.

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?

Provides example queries and explains relevance ranking. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond the context of siblings.

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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The DMV-specific tools are individually distinct, but they are buried among ~30 unrelated Pipeworx utilities with several overlapping pairs (ask_pipeworx variants, entity_profile/compare_entities/recent_changes, and the polymarket suite). An agent pointed at this server cannot reliably tell which tools belong to the California DMV domain versus the general data platform.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use lowercase snake_case, and the ca_dmv_* family is consistent, but there is no coherent semantic pattern across the set: some names are noun phrases (entity_profile), some verb phrases (discover_tools, validate_claim), and many are product-specific prefixes (ask_pipeworx, polymarket_*). The formatting is consistent, but the naming conventions are mixed.

Tool Count1/5

37 tools is far too many for a California DMV server; only 6 are actually DMV-specific. The remaining ~30 tools cover general Pipeworx data lookup, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions, and AI visibility, which belong in a separate server entirely.

Completeness2/5

For the stated DMV scope, the surface is thin: it covers registrations, licenses, offices, forms, insurance codes, and EV adoption, but misses common DMV queries like registration fees, title/status lookups, and appointment or transaction data. The 30 unrelated tools do not fill these domain gaps and instead obscure them.