Skip to main content
Glama

Banco do Brasil MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_get_item_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the current status of a bank connection (UPDATED, UPDATING, LOGIN_ERROR, etc.), its executionStatus, connector metadata, and a reconnect_url that reopens the widget in UPDATE mode for that connection (re-authenticate / enter MFA token in place, without disconnecting and without consuming a connection slot). Omit item to get the status of ALL linked banks at once (returns { count, items }); pass item for a single bank.

Bulk support: accepts item_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemNo
item_idNo
item_idsNo

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, such as the reconnect_url behavior (opens widget in UPDATE mode without slot consumption) and the return fields (executionStatus, connector metadata). 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is moderately concise but includes some details (e.g., status list, reconnect_url explanation) that could be streamlined. It is front-loaded with the main purpose but slightly verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema is provided, yet the description only partially describes return values (e.g., bulk returns `{ count, items }` but single bank structure is vague). The undocumented `item_id` parameter also contributes to incompleteness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

While `item` and `item_ids` are explained, the schema lists an `item_id` parameter that is not described, leaving ambiguity. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to fully clarify all parameters.

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 returns the current status of a bank connection, enumerates possible statuses, and distinguishes between querying all banks vs. a single bank, effectively differentiating it from sibling tools.

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?

Guidance is provided on when to omit `item` (all banks) vs. pass it (single bank), and bulk support via `item_ids` is mentioned. However, it lacks explicit advice on when not to use this tool compared to similar listing tools.

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

All Banco do Brasil 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct resources and operations (balance, accounts, loans, investments, connections, provider status), but credit card bill handling is split across three overlapping tools (get_credit_card_bill, list_credit_card_bills, list_transactions), which could cause misselection. The platform-level tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) are clearly distinct from the finance tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

The openfinance_* tools mostly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_accounts, get_account_balance, update_transaction_category), but a few deviate (openfinance_provider_status, openfinance_search_bank_connectors). The non-prefixed platform tools break the pattern entirely with mixed styles: verbs (connect, authenticate), nouns (marketplace), and noun_verb (report_bug, show_version).

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, this sits at the high end of reasonable scope. Each Open Finance tool maps to a specific endpoint or workflow, and the platform tools are needed for the MCP meta-layer, but the sheer number makes the set feel heavy and harder to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The Open Finance surface is thorough: connection lifecycle, accounts, balances, transactions, credit card bills, loans, investments, categories, and provider health. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no webhook management, no bulk CSV export), but core workflows are well covered and there are no dead ends.

Resources