report_bug
Idempotent
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Secretaria de Inspeção do Trabalho: CAEPI
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotent. The description adds that the conversation should be included for reproduction, but doesn't disclose other behaviors like outcome or auth. With annotations covering safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.
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?
Two sentences, directly states purpose and usage, no redundancy.
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?
Simple tool with good annotations; description covers what it does and how to use it. Missing details about outcome but acceptable given simplicity.
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 has 0% property descriptions, so description must compensate. It explains conversation (include recent messages) but leaves message and context implicit. Partial coverage.
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 reports a bug, missing feature, or feedback, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings (auth, version, etc.) by its explicit purpose.
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?
It implies when to use (when reporting issues) and instructs to include conversation for reproduction. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though siblings are clearly unrelated, so context is clear.
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
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
The tools separate into distinct purposes: authenticate is for login/token acquisition, connect is for connection status, marketplace is for discovering and running MCPs, sit_caepi_consultar is for official Brazilian labor-source queries, while toolkit_info, report_bug, and show_version are general-purpose status/maintenance tools. Some overlap exists between authenticate/connect and marketplace/toolkit_info, but the descriptions delineate their boundaries sufficiently.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names follow inconsistent conventions: five use camelCase (authenticate, connect, marketplace) while four use snake_case (sit_caepi_consultar, toolkit_info, report_bug, show_version). There is also no consistent verb-object structure: 'sit_caepi_consultar' mixes a domain prefix with a verb, and 'toolkit_info' uses a noun rather than a verb. No discernible pattern by which an agent could predict tool names.
Tool Count4/5
Seven tools is a reasonable size for a server that combines authentication, an MCP catalog, a domain-specific query worker, and status/feedback functions. It is neither an extreme single-domain emptiness nor a bloated them need to be expanded, and each tool can be justified as part of the larger portal/toolkit vision.
Completeness3/5
The main gap is domain-specific coverage: for a 'CAEPI' server there is only one tool dedicated to official labor-question queries (sit_caepi_consultar), which may work but does not cover ongoing processes beyond, say, obtaining records/sharing workers or other closed processes. On the platform side, the marketplace and data are useful but the platform is more of a meta-platform than a complete official labor inspection itself.