Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
WACrew

WACrew

by sumioshi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

dashboard

Shows a per-client business view: activity, contract, deliveries, message volume, delivery value, and signals. Filter to flagged clients to find renewal risks, contract mismatches, and inactivity.

Instructions

Visão de negócio por cliente: atividade 30 d, contrato, entregas 30 d/total, mensagens e valor por entrega, e SINAIS (encerrado-ativo, sem-contrato-ativo, pausado-ativo, renovacao-30d, sem-entrega-30d) com uma frase explicando cada um. Use pra responder 'quem está ativo demais pro contrato', 'quem renova este mês', 'quantas entregas o cliente X recebeu'. so_sinais: true devolve só as linhas com sinal. Contratos e entregas refletem na hora; atividade de mensagens pode ter até 60 s de atraso.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
so_sinaisNotrue = só clientes com algum sinal

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description does real work: it discloses a 60-second staleness window for message activity while contracts and deliveries are live, and it explains that each signal carries an explanatory phrase. It never states the operation is read-only or how much data a row contains, which are the remaining gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

Front-loads the aggregate scope, then the signal list, then the usage examples and the freshness caveat — a sensible ordering. The signal enumeration and parenthetical are dense but each element maps to real output content, so little is wasted.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return contents, and it does so by enumerating every field and signal plus the freshness behaviour. It omits the row/response shape and units for 'valor por entrega', which a caller summarizing results would want.

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?

Only one optional boolean, and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage ('true = só clientes com algum sinal'). The description restates this as returning only rows that carry a signal, adding row-level meaning but no filter syntax or defaults beyond the structured field.

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?

Names the specific resource (a per-client business dashboard) and enumerates exactly what it aggregates: 30-day activity, contract, deliveries 30d/total, messages and value per delivery, plus five named signals. An agent can tell from the text alone that this is a consolidated read view rather than a messaging or contact tool.

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?

Gives three concrete question patterns it is meant to answer ('quem está ativo demais pro contrato', 'quem renova este mês', 'quantas entregas o cliente X recebeu'), which crisply frames the use case. It stops short of naming when NOT to use it or which sibling to pick for raw message/contract lookups.

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