Skip to main content
Glama
0xKoller

MCP Argentina Datos

by 0xKoller

salud

Check the operational status and health of the Argentina Datos API to verify service availability and functionality.

Instructions

Devuelve el estado de la salud de la API

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • main.ts:581-612 (handler)
    The complete handler for the "salud" tool, registered with MCP server.tool. It calls the getSalud helper, checks the API status, and returns formatted text responses.
    server.tool(
      "salud",
      "Devuelve el estado de la salud de la API",
      {},
      async ({}) => {
        try {
          const data = await getSalud();
          if (data.estado === "Correcto") {
            return {
              content: [
                { type: "text", text: "La API está funcionando correctamente" },
              ],
            };
          } else {
            return {
              content: [
                { type: "text", text: "La API no está funcionando correctamente" },
              ],
            };
          }
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: "Error al obtener el estado de la salud de la API",
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Schema definition for the "salud" tool in the server's initial tools list, including name, description, and empty parameters schema.
    {
      name: "salud",
      description: "Devuelve el estado de la salud de la API",
      parameters: {},
    },
  • Helper function getSalud that fetches and returns the health status (estado) from the external API endpoint.
    export const getSalud = async () => {
      const salud = await fetch(`${BASE_URL}/estado`);
      const data = await salud.json();
      return data;
    };
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns API health status, which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'health' entails (e.g., uptime, metrics). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant 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, efficient sentence in Spanish that directly states the tool's purpose. It's front-loaded with no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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?

Given the complexity (simple health check) but lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the return value includes (e.g., status codes, metrics), potential errors, or operational context. For a tool with no structured data beyond the input schema, more detail would be helpful.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter details in the description. The description doesn't add parameter semantics, but that's appropriate here. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, as it avoids unnecessary information.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Devuelve el estado de la salud de la API' clearly states the tool's purpose (returns API health status) with a specific verb ('devuelve') and resource ('estado de la salud de la API'), but it doesn't distinguish this from any sibling tools. Since there are no obvious health-check siblings in the list, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, timing, or context for checking API health, nor does it reference any sibling tools for comparison. This leaves the agent without usage direction.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/0xKoller/mcp-argentina-datos'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server