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 confirm read-only and idempotent behavior, and the description adds valuable output specifics: authenticated:true with empty pending[] when connected, and connect_url plus per-install URLs when missing credentials. This enriches understanding of return values 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 tool's purpose, and no fluff. Each sentence adds critical behavioral details without redundancy.
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?
With no output schema, the description fully explains the return structure for both possible scenarios. It covers all necessary information for an agent to use the tool correctly, including output fields and their meaning.
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?
No parameters exist in the schema, and schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters; baseline per rubric is 4.
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?
Description clearly states the tool returns connection status and URLs, with specific behavior for both connected and missing-credential states. It distinguishes itself from 'authenticate' by focusing purely on status retrieval.
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 usage for checking connection status but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'authenticate'. It provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, leaving the agent to infer based on tool name and sibling context.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the wearable data tools (dietaai_libre_data, dietaai_sibionics_data, dietaai_sibionics_glucose) and the diary-related tools (dietaai_diary, dietaai_diary_logs, dietaai_diary_scheme). The distinctions are subtle and may confuse agents.
The naming is inconsistent: many tools use the 'dietaai_' prefix with noun-based names, while others like 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', 'report_bug', 'show_version', and 'toolkit_info' break the pattern entirely. The mix of English and Portuguese further reduces consistency.
With 19 tools, the server is on the higher end of the typical range. While it covers a broad domain (diet tracking, wearable integrations, marketplace), the count is borderline and could feel heavy.
The server focuses heavily on reading data (profiles, diary, foods, goals, wearable data) but lacks obvious write operations like updating goals, deleting diary entries, or modifying user settings. The single log tool (dietaai_log) is the only write path, leaving notable gaps for a full lifecycle.