MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.): log in in the browser, copy the access token. Best: add it to this server's config as a header Authorization: Bearer <token> for a permanent, non-expiring connection. Or paste it here for a session-only login: call with { token: "" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: explains permanent vs session login, how to use token, and that calling with no args gives a link. No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is detailed and front-loaded but slightly verbose; still, every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers authentication fully: purpose, usage modes, and behavioral details. No output schema, but return values are implicit.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains the 'token' parameter: it's a JWT, and describes two modes of use (config vs session paste).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool authenticates MCP.AI IDE agents, explains login process and token usage, and is distinct from sibling tools like 'connect' and openfinance tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explains when to use it (for login, with or without token) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. However, the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear separation between general server utilities (authenticate, connect, marketplace) and the openfinance_* family (get/list/search/update per domain). No two tools appear to overlap: list_transactions vs list_transactions_by_item are differentiated by granularity, and get_item_status vs provider_status by scope. The marketplace tool, while broad, is explicitly named and described, so it doesn't cause ambiguity.
All 20 openfinance_* tools follow a strict verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_accounts, get_account_balance, force_sync, update_transaction_category, etc.). The five general tools also use snake_case and clear names, maintaining consistency across the set. No mixing of conventions or inconsistent verb styles.
At 25 tools, the set is on the higher end but well-justified for a platform that aggregates Open Finance data and provides a marketplace. The 20 openfinance tools cover distinct banking operations (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, sync, status, search, categories), each addressing a specific need. The 5 general tools handle authentication, connection status, and platform info. No obvious trivial or redundant tools; each earns its place.
The tool surface is comprehensive for the stated domain: CRUD-like coverage across financial resources (list/get for accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments), plus state management (force_sync, disconnect, update_category) and ecosystem support (search_connectors, provider_status, marketplace). It also includes utilities like authenticate, connect, and version/bug reporting. No missing operations that would cause agent failures; the set covers connection lifecycle, data retrieval, and even API diagnostics.