Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
radar-cnpj-mcp

radar-cnpj-mcp

by wendersoon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Status da base

status_base
Read-only

Verify the dataset's reference month, imported Brazilian states, and total establishment count before searching or exporting CNPJ company data.

Instructions

Informa o mês de referência dos dados, as UFs importadas e o total de estabelecimentos.

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": "status_base"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior context by enumerating what the response reports (reference month, UFs, establishment count), which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that lists the reported fields in a natural order with no redundant wording. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

For a no-argument, read-only status tool with no output schema, listing the three returned data points is sufficient for an agent to decide whether to call it. There is no complexity left unexplained.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, consistent with the empty input schema.

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?

The description names a specific verb ('Informa') and three concrete resources: reference month, imported UFs, and total establishments. This clearly separates it from query-oriented siblings like buscar_empresas or contar_empresas, though it never explicitly says it is a metadata/status tool rather than a data query.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool to call to learn data coverage/freshness before querying. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of calling it before buscar_empresas or contar_empresas to validate the reference month, and no exclusions.

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