Skip to main content
Glama

CorpusIQ

by io.corpusiq

Get Connector Status

get_connector_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return a pre-formatted Markdown dashboard showing every configured connector's status. IMPORTANT: The output is a complete, ready-to-display Markdown table — show it to the user exactly as returned, do NOT summarize or paraphrase. Each row includes connector name, provider, connection status (with emoji indicators), and a clickable link to authenticate if needed. After displaying the table, offer to help the user connect any unauthorized services and mention they can say 'refresh status' after authenticating.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
connector_idNoOptional connector ID to filter results (e.g. 'google_workspace', 'quickbooks', 'hubspot', 'slack', 'ebay', 'dropbox', 'onedrive', 'outlook', 'shopify', 'facebook_marketing', 'tiktok', 'klaviyo', 'youtube', 'google_ads', 'postgres', 'mssql', 'cosmosdb', 'mongodb', 'gohighlevel', 'monday')

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive. Description adds crucial behavioral detail: output must be shown verbatim, includes emoji indicators and clickable links, and follow-up actions are expected. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, display instruction, follow-up. No filler, front-loaded with the core action. Perfectly 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?

No output schema, so description fully explains the return value (Markdown table with columns, emoji, links) and post-display behavior. For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, this is complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, with a list of example values for connector_id. The tool description does not mention the parameter at all, so it adds no value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Return a pre-formatted Markdown dashboard showing every configured connector's status.' The description distinguishes from sibling connector-specific tools (e.g., enable/disable/resolve) by focusing on aggregate status display.

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?

Explicit context: 'show it to the user exactly as returned, do NOT summarize' and post-display guidance (offer help, mention refresh). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is strong enough for a 4.

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

All CorpusIQ toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes: query_database also covers MSSQL alongside query_mssql_database, and list_database_tables overlaps list_mssql_tables. get_user_statistics duplicates get_my_usage_stats, and runbook/skill selection tools (select_runbook, invoke_skill, run_runbook) have fuzzy boundaries. Most connectors are clearly named by source, but these redundancies create real misselection risk.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is `<source>_connector` for the many integrations, which is consistent. However, the rest mixes styles: `get_*`, `list_*`, `query_*`, `search_*`, and domain-specific families like `canonical_facts_*` vs `canonical_context_get` vs `canonical_decisions_add`. The naming is readable but not uniform.

Tool Count1/5

123 tools is far beyond any reasonable scope for a single MCP server. Even for a multi-service data platform, the catalog is bloated and will overwhelm an agent's context and tool-selection accuracy.

Completeness4/5

The server covers a wide range of data sources (CRM, ads, email, SEO, ecommerce, finance, databases, YouTube) plus meta-capabilities like canonical facts, metric specs, truth sources, and runbooks. Minor gaps exist (e.g., most connectors are read-only, and some umbrella tools may not expose every operation), but the core intent of querying and analyzing business data is well served.

Resources