Check which TCE-PR official catalogs and years are available for consultation, including bidding, court decisions, construction, and other public data bases.
Descobre arquivos e anos efetivamente publicados nos catálogos oficiais do TCE-PR.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| base | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive traits. The description adds the nuance that it lists items 'actually published', implying it reflects real catalog state rather than a static list, which is valuable extra context beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is one efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. No fluff or redundant phrasing.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is a simple discovery operation with an output schema (not shown but implied). The description explicitly states it returns files and years, enough for the agent to understand the outcome. The optionality of the base parameter (null default) suggests listing all bases, but the description does not state this — a minor gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema provides an enum for the single optional 'base' parameter, listing catalog codes like licitacoes and acordaos. The description does not explain these codes, but the enum itself is self-explanatory for domain users. With 0% schema description coverage, some clarification of the base semantics would help, but the enum reduces the need.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the tool discovers files and years actually published in TCE-PR official catalogs. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like listar_arquivos_zip_pr, which focuses on zip files. It is clear but not overly detailed.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions for selecting this over consultar_base_pr or listar_arquivos_zip_pr, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.