Skip to main content
Glama
italia

Schema.gov.it MCP Server

Official
by italia

Compare Local Ontology with schema.gov.it

compare_local_with_remote
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare an ontology file with schema.gov.it to identify matching classes and properties, revealing which local terms are missing for alignment.

Instructions

Compare classes and/or properties defined in an ontology available on the server filesystem or through HTTP upload against schema.gov.it.

Args (provide exactly one of file_path or upload_id):

  • file_path: Absolute path on the MCP server filesystem. Use only if the server can really read that path.

  • upload_id: UUID returned by POST /upload. Use this in HTTP/remote mode when the ontology file is not present on the server.

  • type: What to compare — "classes" | "properties" | "all" (default: "classes")

  • limit: Max local items to check (default: 50)

Important for remote MCP servers:

  • file_path is not a transport mechanism. It works only for files visible to the server process.

  • If the ontology sits on the client machine, call get_upload_instructions, execute the curl command via Bash tool (without reading the file), then use the upload_id here.

  • Never copy ontology text into the conversation — use get_upload_instructions + Bash tool to send bytes directly.

Returns:

  • matched: URIs found in both local file and schema.gov.it (with Italian label if available)

  • local_only: URIs defined locally but absent from schema.gov.it

  • summary counts

Use when: Starting to build an ontology — quickly discover which of your classes/properties already exist in schema.gov.it so you can reuse or align them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoWhat to compareclasses
limitNoMax local items to check remotely
file_pathNoAbsolute path to the local ontology file (local/Docker)
upload_idNoUpload UUID returned by POST /upload (HTTP mode)
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds behavioral details: input methods (file_path vs upload_id), limitations of file_path for remote servers, and return structure (matched, local_only, summary).

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 well-structured with clear sections (args, important notes, returns, usage hint). It is concise yet thorough, front-loading the main purpose.

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?

Given the complexity (4 params, no output schema, comparative logic), the description covers all necessary aspects: input, behavior, return values, and usage context. No gaps remain.

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%, but description adds value by explaining the requirement to provide exactly one of file_path or upload_id, defining the type enum, and detailing the limit parameter. This goes beyond the schema.

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 it compares classes and/or properties from a local ontology against schema.gov.it, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on alignment with schema.gov.it.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to use (starting to build an ontology) and provides alternatives (use get_upload_instructions + Bash if file is not on server). Also warns against incorrect usage of file_path.

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/italia/dati-semantic-mcp'

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