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=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral specifics: returns authenticated:true or connect_urls, enhancing transparency beyond 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, no wasted words. Highly concise.
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 read-only tool, the description sufficiently explains the two main output states. Missing error handling or partial connection cases, but adequate.
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, so schema coverage is 100%. The description correctly adds no parameter information; baseline 4 applies.
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, distinguishing it from sibling tools like authenticate. It explains two scenarios, which is specific.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like authenticate or other status tools. The description describes behavior but doesn't set context for selection.
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.
Each openfinance tool targets a distinct resource/operation (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, sync, status), and the non-openfinance tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) are clearly separate. The only near-overlap is between openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, but the latter explicitly handles whole-connection consolidation and the descriptions clarify when to use each.
All openfinance tools share the `openfinance_` prefix with a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_, get_, update_, force_sync, provider_status, search_). Non-openfinance tools use simple imperative verbs (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version) and the noun-phrase toolkit_info, all consistent in style with no mixed conventions.
25 tools is on the high side, but each serves a distinct function within the comprehensive Open Finance domain (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, sync, status) plus general server utilities. The count is justified by the breadth of the domain, though it exceeds the typical 3-15 range.
The surface covers the full read lifecycle for financial data: listing and detail for accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, plus connection management (list, disconnect, force_sync), categories, and provider status. Missing write operations like transfers are likely out of scope, and minor gaps such as no separate 'get investment' detail are acceptable since list_investments returns comprehensive data.