Skip to main content
Glama

flatin.pt — Portuguese homes: taxes, construction, new-builds

Compare 2 to 5 Portuguese municipalities

compare_municipalities
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the person is choosing between two to five Portuguese municipalities, with the same figures for each as municipality_stats. Do not use it for a single municipality (municipality_stats) or for the areas inside one city (where_to_live). Names that point at the same municipality count once, and fewer than two distinct ones are refused (bad_count). One unknown or ambiguous name refuses the whole comparison.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
languageNoLanguage of the page links and labels; the text summary and field names stay English. uk is accepted as ua.en
municipalitiesYesTwo to five municipality names or codes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / language / description
      Previous value: -"Language of the site content in the answer (verdicts, definitions, labels) and of the page links: pt, en, ru, ua (or uk), de, fr, nl. Field names and the summary stay English. Default: en"New value: +"Language of the page links and labels; the text summary and field names stay English. uk is accepted as ua."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "attribution": {
      +          "type": "object"
      +        },
      +        "language": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "municipalities": {
      +          "items": {
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "url": {
      +          "description": "Absolute URL or null",
      +          "type": [
      +            "string",
      +            "null"
      +          ]
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "language",
      +        "municipalities",
      +        "url",
      +        "attribution"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "candidates": {
      +          "items": {
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "error": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "message": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "suggestions": {
      +          "items": {
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "error",
      +        "message"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Success, or a refusal with an error code. Units: *_cents euro cents, *_eur euros, *_eur_m2 euros per m², *_pct and percent in percent.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description goes further by disclosing failure modes: duplicate names collapse to one, fewer than two distinct names is refused with bad_count, and one unknown/ambiguous name aborts the whole comparison. That is exactly the trap-handling context an agent needs before calling.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: usage trigger first, exclusions second, edge-case resolution third. No filler and the primary condition is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover safety. Combined with the stated error behaviors and the reference to municipality_stats' figures, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly on the first attempt.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantics beyond the schema: entries are resolved as names or codes, duplicates count once, and the distinct count is what must be 2-5. It does not touch the language parameter, though the schema documents that fully.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('compare' + 'two to five Portuguese municipalities') and anchors the output to a known sibling's figures ('same figures for each as municipality_stats'). An agent can immediately distinguish it from municipality_stats and where_to_live.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-use ('person is choosing between two to five municipalities') and explicit when-not, naming both alternatives and the condition that selects each. Nothing is left to inference.

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.

Resources