Skip to main content
Glama

Necton MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_force_sync

Forces the bank to re-sync one or more connections NOW and WAITS for it to finish (PATCH /items/:id, then polls until the item stops updating, up to ~60s). Use this when a balance or transaction list looks stale: a connection can read UPDATED yet be hours old, and this pulls fresh data WITHOUT disconnecting/reconnecting. Pass items as an array of selectors (item_id, connector_id, connector_name, or the user-set custom_label nickname); OMIT items to sync ALL linked banks. Returns { results, errors }; each result has the final status, executionStatus, lastUpdatedAt (advances when data is refreshed), and synced (true = fresh data is ready). needs_action (e.g. MFA_REINTERACTION / LOGIN_ERROR / WAITING_USER_INPUT) means the user must re-authenticate — those results include a reconnect_url that opens the widget in UPDATE mode for that exact connection (user enters credentials / MFA token, data refreshes in place, no slot consumed, no disconnect needed). timed_out: true means the sync is still running — re-check with openfinance_get_item_status. Set wait: false for fire-and-forget (returns immediately while UPDATING).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNo
itemsNo

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses non-obvious behaviors: it polls up to 60s, returns detailed results including status, executionStatus, and potential needs_action with reconnect_url. Annotations only provide basic hints, so the description carries the burden well without contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is verbose but every sentence adds value, covering purpose, usage, parameters, returns, and edge cases. It is front-loaded with the main action. Minor reduction possible, but structure is clear.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no output schema, the description provides detailed return format and error explanations (needs_action, timed_out, reconnect_url). The complexity of syncing and waiting is fully addressed, making the agent capable of using the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description fully explains both parameters: items as an array of selectors (item_id, connector_id, connector_name, custom_label) and the optional wait boolean. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description compensates completely, adding meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool forces a bank to re-sync connections and waits for completion. It specifies the HTTP method (PATCH) and polling behavior, differentiating it from sibling tools like openfinance_get_item_status.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly advises using this tool when balances or transactions look stale, and provides guidance on fire-and-forget mode with wait=false. It also instructs to re-check with openfinance_get_item_status on timeout, offering clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Necton MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., force_sync vs get_item_status, list_accounts vs get_accounts_detail). Minor overlap exists between list_transactions and list_transactions_by_item, and between get_account_balance and list_accounts (which also contains balance), but descriptions clarify when each should be used.

Naming Consistency4/5

All openfinance_* tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (list, get, force_sync, disconnect, update). The generic tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) are also lowercase with underscores where needed, though they lack the openfinance prefix. No mixing of camelCase or chaotic patterns, so mostly consistent with minor deviation.

Tool Count3/5

25 tools is on the heavy side for a single server, but justified given the breadth of Open Finance operations (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, provider status). The count is borderline heavy but not excessive for the domain, though some consolidation could be possible (e.g., merging get_account_balance into list_accounts).

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for financial data: listing, getting details, forcing syncs, disconnecting, updating categories, checking provider status, and handling investments/loans/bills. No obvious dead ends; even connection management includes search, connect URLs, and re-authentication flows. The set appears comprehensive for its intended purpose.

Resources