Skip to main content
Glama

Méliuz MCP

openfinance_get_item_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the current status of a bank connection (UPDATED, UPDATING, LOGIN_ERROR, etc.), its executionStatus, connector metadata, and a reconnect_url that reopens the widget in UPDATE mode for that connection (re-authenticate / enter MFA token in place, without disconnecting and without consuming a connection slot). Omit item to get the status of ALL linked banks at once (returns { count, items }); pass item for a single bank.

Bulk support: accepts item_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemNo
item_idNo
item_idsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_ids
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
  4. Added
  5. Removed
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: the reconnect_url reopens the widget in UPDATE mode without disconnecting or consuming a slot, and it mentions bulk support. No contradictions with 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?

The description is two sentences: first sentence packs the core functionality with return values and special behavior (reconnect_url), second sentence covers bulk usage. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information. Highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, but the description details the return fields (status, executionStatus, connector metadata, reconnect_url) and the bulk response shape ({ count, items }). For a read-only status tool, this provides sufficient context to use correctly. Could mention pagination or error handling, but not essential for basic usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It explains 'item' (single bank), 'item_ids' (batch), and the omission pattern for all banks. However, the parameter 'item_id' (a separate string) is not explained, leaving ambiguity about its purpose versus 'item'. Partial compensation but incomplete.

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?

The description explicitly states it returns the current status of a bank connection, listing specific fields (status, executionStatus, connector metadata, reconnect_url). It distinguishes between retrieving all connections vs. a single one, and mentions bulk support via item_ids. This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like openfinance_list_connections and openfinance_get_account_balance.

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?

The description provides clear usage guidance: omit 'item' for all connections, pass 'item' for a single connection, and use item_ids for batch execution. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context of sibling tools implies appropriate use cases. No explicit exclusions or alternatives are given, which prevents a higher score.

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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation or data type (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, etc.) with no ambiguity. Even closely related tools like openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item are clearly differentiated by scope and output format.

Naming Consistency3/5

The majority of tools follow the 'openfinance_' prefix for banking operations, but utility tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) break this pattern, creating an inconsistent mix. However, the convention is still readable and the utilities are clearly distinct.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is on the high side but well-justified by the breadth of Open Finance data types (accounts, transactions, credit cards, bills, loans, investments) and supporting operations (sync, status, search, updates). A few tools could potentially be merged, but overall the number is reasonable for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core Open Finance workflows: listing, reading details, syncing, updating categories, and checking provider status. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to create or delete accounts/transactions), but these are external constraints. The set enables most user-facing financial queries and actions.