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 detail beyond annotations: it explains that calling with no args returns a login link, that the config-header approach yields a non-expiring connection, and that the token arg gives session-only login. This complements the idempotentHint (setting authentication is idempotent) and does not contradict 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 dense sentence followed by a shorter one. It is somewhat verbose but every clause provides useful information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and includes both usage modes, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5 for brevity.
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 simple auth tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential scenarios: permanent setup via config, session-only via token, and obtaining the login link. It does not explain error cases or return values, but that is less critical given the tool's simplicity and the explicit instructions.
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 schema only defines an optional 'token' string with no description. The description compensates by explaining that token is a JWT for session-only login and that omitting it returns a link. This adds meaningful semantics to the parameter.
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's purpose: authentication via access token or browser login. It specifies the verb 'log in' and the resource (authentication), and distinguishes between permanent (config header) and session-only modes. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.
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?
Provides explicit guidance on when to use each mode (permanent config vs session token) and how to invoke the tool (with or without the token argument). It lacks a direct comparison with sibling 'connect', but the usage context is clear and actionable.
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 tools have clearly distinct purposes, but 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' both report connection status, which could cause confusion. The other tools (authenticate, marketplace, identidade_ar_consultar, report_bug, show_version) are well-separated.
Naming is inconsistent: some tools are bare verbs (authenticate, connect), some are nouns (marketplace), some are verb_noun (report_bug, show_version), and one is a Portuguese compound (identidade_ar_consultar). While all use snake_case, the grammatical pattern varies significantly.
7 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range. Each tool earns its place, covering platform management, identity verification, pricing, and support, without excessive overlap or bloat.
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage of the server's apparent scope: authentication, connection status, identity checking, marketplace search and invocation, bug reporting, version info, and toolkit state. There are no obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.