report_bug
Idempotent
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Banco Master MCP
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate the tool is not destructive and is idempotent. The description adds minimal extra behavioral context, only stating it's for reporting. No contradictions, but little value 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.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is two sentences: first states purpose, second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words, well-structured, and easy to parse.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is somewhat incomplete. It covers purpose and one parameter, but not all three parameters. Adequate for a simple tool but could be improved.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema has 0% description coverage. The description only mentions the 'conversation' parameter, ignoring 'message' (required) and 'context'. Users get no guidance on what these fields should contain.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description explicitly states the tool's purpose: report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools which are mostly related to openfinance or authentication.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Description provides specific guidance to include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction. While it doesn't mention when not to use it or alternative tools, the advice 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.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5
Most openfinance_* tools are clearly separated by resource and action, and the long descriptions help, but several pairs can trip up an agent: authenticate/connect both deal with login/connection state, openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item sound nearly identical, and marketplace internally exposes report_bug/list_tools functions that also exist as top-level tools. This is more than a single ambiguous edge.
Naming Consistency3/5
The 19 openfinance_* tools follow a clean get_/list_/update_ pattern and are easy to navigate, but the platform-level tools break the convention: authenticate, connect, marketplace, toolkit_info, report_bug, and show_version mix bare verbs, nouns, and noun-noun compounds. The pattern is not chaotic, but it is definitely mixed.
Tool Count3/5
25 tools is on the heavy end of the borderline range and is a large working set for an agent. The openfinance tools are individually justified and support batching, but the extra platform/marketplace tools add scope and some redundancy with report_bug and toolkit_info.
Completeness5/5
For a bank-data aggregation server, the surface is complete: connector discovery, linking/reconnecting/disconnecting, account lists and details, balances, transactions, categorization, credit-card bills, investments, loans, sync status, and provider health are all covered. There are no obvious dead ends in the main workflows.