show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
SINTEGRA: DF
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral details beyond what the annotations already specify (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive). It does not mention any side effects or prerequisites.
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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or unnecessary details.
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 no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns (version information). It is complete for the intended query.
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?
There are no parameters to describe, so the baseline score of 4 applies. The description does not need to compensate for missing parameter details.
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 the tool shows current MCP platform and adapter versions, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like authenticate or connect.
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?
The intended use is implicit—when version information is needed—but no explicit exclusions or alternative comparisons are provided. Still, the purpose is unambiguous.
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
A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: authentication, connection status, marketplace discovery/execution, bug reporting, version check, specific data consultation, and toolkit overview. No overlapping functions that would cause an agent to misselect.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names follow no consistent pattern: single verbs (authenticate, connect), compound verbs (report_bug, show_version), a bare noun (marketplace), and a domain-specific descriptive name (sintegra_df_consultar). The mixture of styles makes it unpredictable.
Tool Count5/5
7 tools is well within the ideal range (3-15) and each serves a necessary function for a server that manages platform connections and offers a specific data query. The scope is appropriately matched to the tool count.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers the core lifecycle: authentication, connection status, tool discovery/execution, billing management, feedback, version, and toolkit state. A minor gap such as no explicit disconnect or logout is non-critical, but the main workflows are supported.