show_version
Read-onlyIdempotent
Show the current MCP platform and adapter versions.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Histórico Veicular Nacional
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it shows both platform and adapter versions, but does not disclose any additional behavioral aspects such as output format or potential latency, which is fine given the trivial nature.
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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and immediately communicates the tool's function.
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?
For a simple version retrieval tool, the description is sufficiently complete. It names the exact outputs (platform and adapter versions) and, with the annotations covering safety and idempotence, covers the key context. No output schema exists, but the description itself answers the main question.
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 the schema reflects this with no properties. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no param information because none is needed.
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 shows current MCP platform and adapter versions, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'toolkit_info' tool, leaving some ambiguity about when to prefer this over that.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or related tools, so the agent receives no usage direction beyond the basic action.
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
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: authentication, connection status, marketplace operations, version info, toolkit state, and vehicle history query. Some overlap exists between 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' (both report connection state), but descriptions are sufficient to distinguish them. The marketplace tool is broad but internally coherent.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names follow no consistent pattern: single verbs (authenticate, connect), nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), verb-noun with underscore (report_bug, show_version), and a Portuguese domain-specific name (veiculo_historico_consultar). Mixing languages and grammatical forms makes the naming unpredictable.
Tool Count3/5
Seven tools is a reasonable number for a platform utility server, but the server name suggests a dedicated vehicle history service, with only one tool actually related to that domain. The rest are generic MCP meta-tools, making the count seem padded or the scope unclear.
Completeness2/5
For a server named 'Histórico Veicular Nacional', only one tool addresses the apparent domain. There are no other vehicle-related operations (e.g., search by plate, list vehicles, different document types), and the remaining tools are unrelated platform utilities. This leaves significant gaps if the intended use is comprehensive vehicle history coverage.