Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Conexa MCP

Conexa MCP

by Expert-Integrado
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

GET /sale/:id (Sale)

get_sale
Read-only

Retrieve main sale data for any sale, including one-time and recurring transactions. Use the sale ID to access key details.

Instructions

Recuperação dos principais dados de uma venda, independente de ser avulsa ou recorrente.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_sale"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesValor de :id na rota /sale/:id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it retrieves main data for any sale type, but does not elaborate on authorization, rate limits, or what 'main data' entails. This is adequate but not exceptional.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It could be improved by adding structure (e.g., bullet points for usage notes), but it is not overly verbose.

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 no output schema, the description should specify what fields are returned by 'principais dados'. It also lacks information on prerequisites or permissions. For a simple read tool, this is a notable gap reducing completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for the sole parameter 'id'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Recuperação' (retrieve) and the resource 'principais dados de uma venda' (main data of a sale), and explicitly covers both single and recurring sales, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_recurring_sale and list_sales.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_recurring_sale or list_sales. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or contextual hints are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools