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?
The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations by explaining the two response states (all connected vs missing credentials) and their fields. However, it does not fully elaborate on the meaning of pending[] or per-install URLs.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by conditional behavior. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.
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?
The description covers the two main cases (all connected vs missing credentials) but leaves partial connection states ambiguous. It also does not explain what pending[] contains or how per-install URLs are structured, which may be needed for full understanding.
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 has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so there is nothing to add. The baseline of 4 applies as the description correctly handles the absence of parameters without inventing unnecessary input details.
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 function: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings like authenticate by specifying response behavior (authenticated:true vs connect_url) rather than just repeating the name.
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 (checking connection status) but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like authenticate or show_version. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.
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: authenticate handles login, connect shows connection status, marketplace is a catalog/execution platform, and mpf_certidao_consultar is the domain operation. Confusion could arise between marketplace's invoke functionality and the direct tool, and between connect and toolkit_info, but detailed descriptions mitigate ambiguity.
Naming conventions are inconsistent: some tools are single-word verbs (authenticate, connect), some use snake_case with verbs (report_bug, show_version), and others are noun phrases (marketplace, toolkit_info). There is no consistent verb_noun pattern, and mpf_certidao_consultar stands out as a domain-specific name among generic platform names.
With 7 tools, the count is not inherently excessive, but the server is named 'Certidão MPF' and only one tool actually relates to that domain. The other six are generic platform utilities, making the toolset feel bloated for its apparent purpose. A more focused server would have just the certidão tool or additional related domain tools.
For the specific operation of querying a certidão, the single tool mpf_certidao_consultar is complete as it provides the necessary functionality. However, the server's broader purpose is unclear—it includes platform-level tools that do not serve a unified domain, so there are potential gaps if a user expects related certidão operations or management features beyond a simple query.