show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
DETRAN MS: Veículo
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds that it shows both platform and adapter versions, which is a small behavioral detail. It doesn't describe output format or any side effects, but with strong annotations, the bar is lower. No contradiction.
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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Zero waste, perfectly concise for a simple tool.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema, strong annotations), the description is complete enough. It tells the agent what it does. It could mention that it returns version strings, but that's not necessary given the tool's obvious purpose. A 4 is appropriate.
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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description doesn't need to explain parameters because there are none. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description is sufficient.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose: showing current MCP platform and adapter versions. It uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('MCP platform and adapter versions'), which is clear and distinguishes it from sibling tools like authenticate or connect. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'toolkit_info', which might also provide version info, so it's not a 5.
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?
The description implies usage: when you need to know the current versions. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but given the tool's simplicity and the sibling list, it's reasonably clear. No explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations, so it's adequate but not explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5
The vehicle lookup tool is clearly distinct, but several platform tools overlap in responsibility: connect, authenticate, and toolkit_info all deal with connection/auth/toolkit status, and marketplace can also be used to route to domain lookups. The verbose descriptions help, but an agent could still confuse which meta-tool to use in a given situation.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tool names are generally lowercase and readable, but they mix bare verbs (connect, authenticate), verb+noun pairs (show_version, report_bug), noun phrases (marketplace, toolkit_info), and an unusually ordered domain name (detran_ms_veiculo_consultar). There is no single, predictable naming convention across the set.
Tool Count3/5
Seven tools is not an unreasonable raw count, but only one of them is vehicle-domain-specific; the rest are platform/marketplace/auth/status infrastructure. The set feels like a platform wrapper with a single DETRAN tool bolted on, so the count is borderline rather than well-balanced.
Completeness3/5
The server exposes only one DETRAN/vehicle operation, so the domain surface is quite thin for a service named after DETRAN MS vehicle data. There are no explicit secondary operations covering other vehicle-related queries, and the remaining tools are platform management rather than domain functionality. The marketplace tool may help route to other services, but the server's own dedicated domain coverage is limited.