Skip to main content
Glama

Operações acessíveis

list_accounts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lista as operações (contas Neural) que este usuário pode acessar e indica qual está selecionada nesta autorização. Trocar de operação exige nova autorização no Neural (uma autorização = uma operação).

Escopo: profile:read · Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the one-authorization-per-operation constraint and the profile:read scope. 'Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum' is somewhat redundant with the annotations, but the auth model information is valuable and not present in structured fields.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences — purpose first, then the auth constraint and scope metadata. The 'Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum' trailer partly restates the readOnly/destructive annotations, which is the only wasted text.

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?

With no output schema, the description still conveys what is returned (the accessible operations plus which one is currently selected) and the constraint that selection changes require re-authorization. Nothing needed to call this zero-argument 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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a no-argument, context-derived listing.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('operações (contas Neural)') plus the returned attribute (which one is selected). It is clearly a read of accessible accounts, though it does not name distinguishing siblings such as get_identity or get_properties, leaving a small ambiguity about which identity-related call to reach for.

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?

'Trocar de operação exige nova autorização no Neural (uma autorização = uma operação)' effectively tells the agent this tool cannot switch operations and that a re-auth is required — a clear when-not. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, which keeps it short of a 5.

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.