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 |
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?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: calling with no args returns a link, with token logs in. It notes idempotency is implied but not explicit. Could mention that token must be valid. Overall, good coverage.
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?
Three sentences, front-loaded with audience and key options. No fluff, 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?
Lacks description of return values or error cases. For a simple auth tool this may suffice, but it could state what response the agent should expect (e.g., link or success).
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 only parameter 'token' is fully explained: it's optional, and when provided, it performs session login. When omitted, it returns a link. This compensates for zero schema coverage.
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 is for authenticating MCP.AI IDE agents, distinguishing between permanent config and session login. It specifies the verb 'authenticate' and the resource (access token). This differentiates from sibling tools like 'connect'.
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?
Explicitly provides two usage scenarios: adding token to config for permanent access, or passing token as parameter for session-only login. Also specifies calling without arguments to get a link. This gives clear guidance on when to use each method.
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.
Most open_-finance tools are clearly bound to a resource+action, but several pairs require careful reading: list_transactions vs list_transactions_by_item, get_iate_status vs get_provider_status, and connect vs list_connections. The marketplace tool is also a single heavily overloaded tool that bundles search/describe/invoke/install and a prompt library, which blurs its boundary.
The Open Finance tools follow openfinance_verb_noun consistently, and the top-level tools are all snake_case, so there is no wild con convention mixing. Deviations exist in generic tools like marketplace/toolki_i/nfo and in non-verb patterns like accent_status, but overall the naming is readable and predictable.
At 25 tools the server sits at the upper edge of what is comfortably scoped; the many list/get/status endpoints are justified by the Open Finance domain, but the extra marketplace and admin utilities make it feel broader than a single-purpose sovereign. It is not abusive, but it is definitely on the heavy side.
The Open Finance access covers accounts, balances, transactions, credit card bills, investment, loans, connections, diagnostics, force-sync, and transaction recategorization. Missing operations are mostly intentional autentications/connection widget hand-offs (add_connection_url, reconnect_url), so the set can still support common workflows without dead ends.