Returns the current toolkit state: installed MCPs, their connection status, the accounts connected to each one, and how many catalog tools each exposes.
| 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, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, safely covering the mutation profile. The description adds useful context about what exact state components are returned (installed MCPs, statuses, accounts, tool counts), providing transparency about the output scope beyond the 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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Returns the current toolkit state') and then lists the specific components without unnecessary words. Every phrase 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?
Given that the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers both purpose and return content. It names all key aspects of the toolkit state (MCPs, status, accounts, catalog tool counts), making it complete for an agent to understand what to expect.
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 zero parameters, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it sufficiently describes what the tool returns, which is the only relevant semantic content.
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 uses the specific verb 'Returns' and details the exact contents: installed MCPs, their connection status, connected accounts, and catalog tool counts. This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable and clearly distinguishes it from action-oriented siblings like connect and 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 makes it clear that this tool is for inspecting toolkit state, which contrasts with the action-oriented siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. The context implies usage for state checks, but explicit guidance is absent.
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 credit analysis tool is clearly distinct, but several platform tools overlap: authenticate, connect, and toolkit_info all deal with connection/auth status, and marketplace is a mega-tool covering many actions. This overlap could cause an agent to select the wrong utility.
Names mix English verbs (authenticate, connect), English verb_noun (report_bug, show_version), nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and a Portuguese compound (credito_pf_completo_consultar). There is no consistent naming pattern across the set.
Seven tools is within a typical range, but only one tool serves the credit analysis domain; the other six are generic platform utilities. The set feels padded relative to the server's stated purpose.
The single credit tool covers the full consultation: cadastral data, score, pending issues, and history. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct balance or query history), but the marketplace can handle payment top-ups indirectly.