MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.): log in in the browser, copy the access token. Best: add it to this server's config as a header Authorization: Bearer <token> for a permanent, non-expiring connection. Or paste it here for a session-only login: call with { token: "" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, and the description adds context about session vs permanent connections and the token being a JWT. It does not elaborate on error conditions or side effects, but provides useful behavioral details 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loading the tool's purpose. It could be slightly more concise by splitting the long first sentence, but is generally efficient and clear.
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?
While the tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description could be more explicit about what the tool returns (e.g., success indication or token info). It hints at outcomes but leaves some ambiguity.
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 sole parameter 'token' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining its purpose: providing a JWT for session login, or omitting it to get the link. This adds significant meaning.
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 is for authentication, detailing two methods (permanent config or session token). It distinguishes its purpose from sibling tools like 'connect' but does not explicitly differentiate.
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 provides explicit guidance on when to use each mode: call with token after user pastes, or without args to get a login link. It does not address when to use this tool over sibling tools.
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.
Each openfinance_* tool targets a distinct resource (account, transaction, bill, loan, investment) with a clear action (get/list/update/force_sync). The administrative tools (connect, authenticate, report_bug) are clearly separate. No two tools appear to perform the same function.
The openfinance_* tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_account_balance, list_transactions, update_transaction_category). Minor deviations like openfinance_provider_status (lacks a verb) and openfinance_force_sync (verb phrase) slightly break the pattern, but the overall convention is predictable.
25 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a comprehensive Open Finance server covering accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, and administration. Each tool has a distinct purpose and none feel redundant.
The tool surface is complete for the domain: it covers connection management (connect/disconnect/force sync/status), account and transaction queries, credit card bills, loans, investments, and transaction categorization, plus admin utilities. No obvious gaps that would block typical workflows.