Skip to main content
Glama

99Pay MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_search_bank_connectors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches the available bank connectors by name (pass keywords[], e.g. ['nubank','btg']) and returns, per match: the connector id, whether it's Open Finance or API (access), PF/PJ (audience), the user's already-linked connections (and accounts when include_accounts=true), and a ready connect_url with the bank pre-selected. Some non-Open-Finance credential connectors carry a caveat warning that they don't auto-update (needs periodic manual reconnection) — surface it so the user can prefer the institution's Open Finance connector for automation. Honors the user's plan (a PF plan hides PJ banks; a PJ plan covers BOTH — PF and PJ banks connect and count under the same plan). Call this BEFORE connecting to hand the user a one-click link to the right bank. keywords[] is REQUIRED — without it returns a hint (never dumps the whole catalog).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keywordsNo
include_accountsNo

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description adds key behaviors: caveat warning for credential connectors, plan-based filtering, and that keywords are required (returns hint otherwise). These enrich agent understanding.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is comprehensive but somewhat verbose; it packs many details in a single paragraph. It could be structured into clearer sections, but each sentence adds value.

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 return fields (id, access, audience, connections, connect_url, caveat) and behavior (plan, required keywords). It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description explains both parameters: 'keywords' is required (with examples) and 'include_accounts' controls linked accounts. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the tool searches bank connectors by name, returns specific fields, and provides a connect_url. It distinguishes from siblings like 'connect' and 'authenticate' by focusing on search and pre-selection.

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?

The description advises calling this before connecting to get a one-click link, and explains plan behavior and caveats. It could more explicitly contrast with other tools, but the context is sufficient.

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

All 99Pay MCP 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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.

Naming Consistency5/5

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.

Tool Count4/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources