Apibara Vehicle Auction Data

Get vehicle

get_vehicle

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when the user already has a VIN, lot number or supported slug and needs the current normalized vehicle record. Request include history and/or vin_lots when the same tool call should also return retained sale history or other known auction lots for the same VIN.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`include`	No	Optional related data to embed in the vehicle detail result.
`identifier`	Yes	VIN, lot number or slug_vin accepted by the canonical vehicle detail endpoint.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / include

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional related data to embed in the vehicle detail result.",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "history",
+      "vin_lots"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 2,
+  "type": "array",
+  "uniqueItems": true
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / identifier / description

Previous value: -"VIN or slug_vin accepted by the canonical vehicle detail endpoint."New value: +"VIN, lot number or slug_vin accepted by the canonical vehicle detail endpoint."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Structured JSON returned by the canonical Apibara Vehicle Auction Data API. Source-dependent fields may be null or absent.",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description carries less burden. It adds useful context about accepted identifier types and optional inclusion of history or vin_lots, but does not explain normalization behavior, errors, or what 'retained sale history' means in practice.

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 sentences with no fluff. The primary use condition is front-loaded, and the optional include behavior is explained in the second sentence without repeating schema details.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, a rich output schema, and strong annotations, this description is complete. An agent has enough context to decide when to call it and what parameters to provide.

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 meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that identifier accepts VIN, lot number, or supported slug, and that include history/vin_lots controls whether additional related data is returned in the same call.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a current normalized vehicle record using an identifier the user already has, with optional embedded history or lot data. It distinguishes itself from search-oriented siblings by requiring an existing VIN, lot, or slug, but it does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling tool.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool when the user already has a VIN, lot number, or supported slug, and gives guidance on when to add include history/vin_lots. It does not state when to prefer alternatives such as get_vehicle_history or get_related_vehicles, so exclusions are absent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Apibara Vehicle Auction Data tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?