Laso Finance

get_banking_application

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the banking application

Reads what the application still needs. Returns ready (whether it can be submitted), applicationStatus, and the outstanding questions. The identity answers carry over from verification; what remains are non-identity questions such as employment status and source of funds, which an agent can answer itself.

Free.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 26, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / auth_token

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Laso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 26, 2026
- changedOutput schema / (root)
```
Previous value: -{
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
```
First observedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds value by explaining the output fields (ready, applicationStatus, outstanding questions) and the nuance that identity answers carry over from verification, which is behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction exists.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured with a clear first line that summarizes the purpose, followed by a concise explanation of return values and context. It is slightly verbose with the trailing 'Free.' which adds little value, but the core message is front-loaded and efficient.

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 read-only, zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is highly complete. It explains what the tool returns, clarifies that identity answers are inherited, and describes the nature of remaining questions. No critical information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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, so there is nothing to explain. Per the calibration rule, 0 parameters earns a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to add parameter details since there are none.

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 that the tool reads the banking application and returns readiness, status, and outstanding questions. It distinguishes itself from update/submit siblings by being a read operation, but it does not explicitly name any alternative tools. The verb 'Read' and the resource 'banking application' are specific and unambiguous.

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 after verification to discover non-identity questions, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others like submit_banking_application or update_banking_application_details. It provides context about what remains to be answered, but lacks direct guidance on alternatives or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Laso Finance tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?