Returns connection status and URLs. When all providers are connected, returns authenticated:true and empty pending[]. When credentials are missing, returns connect_url for the toolkit and per-install URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds specific behavioral context about response shape ('authenticated:true', 'empty pending[]', 'connect_url', and per-install URLs) without contradicting 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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no filler. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a zero-parameter status tool with strong annotations, the description covers both main states and the URLs returned. It doesn't detail error cases or the contents of pending[], but this is adequate given the simplicity.
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?
The tool has no parameters; the empty schema provides 100% coverage, so there is nothing to compensate for. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.
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 'Returns connection status and URLs' and explains the two outcome states (connected vs missing credentials), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'authenticate'.
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 implies use for checking connection status and obtaining URLs when credentials are missing, but does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use guidance or name alternatives like 'authenticate'.
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.
The tools are mostly distinct in purpose: the certificate consultation tool is clearly separate from authentication, connection status, marketplace, and feedback tools. Minor overlap exists between 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' regarding connection status, but descriptions clarify their roles.
Tool names mix languages (Portuguese and English) and conventions: 'certidao_debitos_pj_consultar' uses Portuguese snake_case with noun_verb order, while others like 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', and 'report_bug' are English verbs or nouns. There is no consistent verb_noun pattern across the set.
Although 7 tools is within a typical range, most are generic MCP platform utilities (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) that are unrelated to the server's stated purpose of issuing federal debt certificates. The core domain is served by only one tool, making the set feel padded and unfocused.
The primary operation—consulting the joint federal debt certificate via CNPJ—is fully covered by 'certidao_debitos_pj_consultar'. For the narrow stated purpose, no obvious dead-ends exist. Additional supporting operations (e.g., historical queries, certificate validation) could be added but are not essential given the tool's description.