Skip to main content
Glama

ToolRouter

by io.github.Humanleap

List Connectors

connector_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List connected accounts and MCP servers (summary) or detail on one connector. Pass slug for detail including every tool the connector exposes. Optional type: "oauth" | "mcp" filter. Pass include_available: true to also see available catalog MCPs you can connect.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoConnector slug for detail view. Omit to list all.
typeNoFilter by connector type.
contextNoScope: "personal" (default) or "team:<id>" for a team.
include_availableNoWhen true, also include catalog MCPs you have not connected yet.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior; the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: default summary, slug switches to per-connector detail exposing every tool, type filters, and include_available extends the result set. It doesn't describe pagination or the exact list envelope, but the added context goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, each sentence maps to one distinct behavior (base list, slug detail, type filter, include_available). No filler or unnecessary repetition beyond what is useful for correct invocation.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the main output modes (summary vs. per-connector detail including exposed tools) and all optional switches. The 'context' parameter is left to the schema, but schema coverage is complete and there are no required parameters; overall an agent has enough to call this correctly.

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 already documents all 4 parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description mostly restates schema semantics ('Pass slug for detail') and adds only modest color ('including every tool the connector exposes', 'catalog MCPs you can connect'). No significant new parameter meaning is introduced.

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?

States a precise action ('List connected accounts and MCP servers') and clarifies the summary-vs-detail split via slug. The resource is distinct from connector_add/connector_remove/connector_permissions and from credential_list, so an agent can select it correctly.

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?

Gives explicit invocation guidance: pass slug for detail, use type filter, set include_available to include unconnected catalog MCPs. It doesn't name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it stops just short of the strongest level.

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

All ToolRouter 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by clear resource prefixes (account_, brain_, connector_, credential_, file_, job_, key_), and most actions have distinct purposes. A few boundaries overlap—brain_admin's lint action duplicates brain_lint, and account_preferences/setup/switch could momentarily confuse—but the descriptions resolve most ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is resource_verb for actions (file_read, job_cancel, key_create) and resource_noun for state views (credits_balance, brain_settings, account_preferences), which is readable. However, exceptions like discover, use_tool, top_up_credits, and feedback_request_tool break the pattern, and the set is not consistently verb_noun.

Tool Count2/5

47 tools is well beyond the comfortable range; even though prefixes organize them, the agent faces a large selection surface with many narrowly scoped tools. A more consolidated set with action-based subcommands would be easier to navigate.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered end-to-end: account setup and billing, connector and credential management, file CRUD, job polling, key lifecycle, brain knowledge management, and catalogue discovery/execution. Gaps are minor—outfit/persona/product/scene are list-only, connectors lack an update operation, and there is no explicit single-page brain get—but agents can generally work around them.

Resources