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, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safe-read nature is known. The description adds valuable context by explaining conditional behavior: returns authenticated:true when all providers are connected and connect_url when credentials are missing. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.
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 primary purpose. It efficiently covers the key behavioral outcomes without redundancy. Every sentence provides useful information.
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 no-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description is quite complete. It explains the return values in two distinct states, which is the core functionality. While it doesn't detail partial connection states or URL formats, the tool's simplicity and the description's coverage make it sufficient. An explicit usage guideline would push it to 5.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). With no parameters, the description has little to add, but it doesn't need to. The absence of params is inherently well-documented.
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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and clearly states the resource ('connection status and URLs'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'authenticate' by focusing on status checking rather than performing authentication, making the purpose unambiguous.
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 for checking connection status, describing different states. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, such as noting 'Use authenticate to establish a connection.' While the conditionality is described, no direct comparison to siblings 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.
The marketplace tool bundles many sub-actions (search, describe, invoke, install, prompts, etc.) that overlap with report_bug, connect, and toolkit_info, making it unclear which tool to choose for a given task. However, mpt_consultar is clearly distinct, and the core tools are mostly separable.
Tool names mix single verbs (authenticate, connect), nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), Portuguese verbs (mpt_consultar), and snake_case verb_noun patterns (report_bug, show_version). There is no consistent naming convention, which reduces predictability.
Seven tools is a reasonable count for a platform server covering authentication, connection status, marketplace access, bug reporting, versioning, and toolkit state. The broad scope justifies the number, though one tool (marketplace) carries a disproportionate amount of functionality.
The platform lifecycle is well-covered: authentication, connection checks, marketplace exploration/invocation/installation, billing, bug reporting, and version/info. The mpt_consultar tool addresses the specific MPT domain query. Minor gaps exist, such as no dedicated credential management beyond authenticate, but core workflows are not dead-ended.