Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fluig-mcp

fluig-mcp

by alucardigo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

fluig_form_full

Reads an entire Fluig form—metadata, all text files, and events—so you can inspect it before editing or publishing.

Instructions

Lê um formulário INTEIRO: metadados + todos os arquivos (texto) + eventos. Use antes de editar/publicar.

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": {
      "documentId": "<documentId>",
      "version": "<version>",
      "env": "<env>"
    },
    "name": "fluig_form_full"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
envYesOBRIGATÓRIO. Ambiente alvo: "teste" (homologação, o host de FLUIG_HOST) ou "prod" (PRODUÇÃO REAL, o host de FLUIG_HOST_PROD). Não há default: a escolha é sempre explícita, para que ninguém leia homologação achando que é produção nem escreva em produção achando que é teste.
versionYesversão do form
documentIdYesdocumentId

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / documentId / description
      Previous value: -"Form documentId."New value: +"documentId"
    • addedInput schema / properties / env
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "OBRIGATÓRIO. Ambiente alvo: \"teste\" (homologação, o host de FLUIG_HOST) ou \"prod\" (PRODUÇÃO REAL, o host de FLUIG_HOST_PROD). Não há default: a escolha é sempre explícita, para que ninguém leia homologação achando que é produção nem escreva em produção achando que é teste.",
+  "enum": [
+    "teste",
+    "prod"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / version / description
      Previous value: -"Form version."New value: +"versão do form"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "documentId",
-  "version"
-]New value: +[
+  "documentId",
+  "version",
+  "env"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It helpfully discloses that all files come back as text only and that events are included, implying a large composite read, but it says nothing about payload size limits, truncation, permissions, or error behavior on a missing documentId/version.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the scope stated first and the usage trigger second. Nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Three required params are fully documented and the composite return content is named, which is adequate with no output schema. However, for an aggregating read with no annotations, it should say more about the shape/size of the result and the read-only safety profile.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the env parameter is documented in depth (teste vs prod hosts, no default, explicit choice rationale). The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lê') and a specific scope ('formulário INTEIRO'), then enumerates the payload: metadados + todos os arquivos (texto) + eventos. That enumeration implicitly distinguishes it from the partial siblings (fluig_form_list, fluig_form_files, fluig_form_events), though none are named explicitly.

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?

'Use antes de editar/publicar' gives a concrete workflow trigger, which is clear when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming the cheaper alternatives (fluig_form_files, fluig_form_events) or stating when NOT to use this heavier aggregate read.

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