Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
FREOA Verifica

FREOA Verifica

by rickfreoa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

historico_dispositivo

Retrieves the timeline of prior wording and events for a cited legal provision from official Brazilian sources, so you can cite the text as it appeared before later amendments.

Instructions

Linha do tempo de redações e eventos do dispositivo citado (trechos entre delimitadores de documento oficial).

Só mostra a história que a fonte oficial traz (por exemplo, redação riscada na própria página); a data do ato alterador não é início de vigência. Sem história na fonte, não afirma que o texto nunca mudou. Use para citar redação antiga; para a vigência numa data, use verificar_citacao com data.

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": {
      "citacao": "<citacao>"
    },
    "name": "historico_dispositivo"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
citacaoYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the history is source-limited, that the altering act's date is not the start of validity, and that absence of history is not a claim of immutability. These epistemic caveats prevent real misinterpretation; only a short read-only/no-side-effects note is missing for a perfect score.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core purpose, then caveats, then the sibling routing. Every sentence carries information; it is dense but not padded, though the parenthetical delimiter remark is slightly awkwardly placed and could be tightened.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so the description needn't describe return values, and it covers purpose, limits and the alternative tool. The remaining gap is input-format guidance for `citacao`, which is the one thing an agent could still get wrong when calling it.

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 0% for the single required parameter `citacao`, so the description must compensate. The parenthetical about 'trechos entre delimitadores de documento oficial' hints at the expected input form, but it does not state the citation syntax, delimiter format, or what happens if the citation is ambiguous or unresolvable.

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 first sentence states a specific verb+resource: a timeline of redactions and events for the cited device, scoped to what the official source contains. It is clearly distinguishable from verificar_citacao, which is named explicitly, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use ('Use para citar redação antiga') and an explicit when-to-use-instead ('para a vigência numa data, use verificar_citacao com `data`'), naming the alternative and the discriminating condition. This is exactly the routing guidance an agent needs.

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