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 |
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?
Discloses behavior beyond annotations: two authentication modes with different persistence (permanent vs session-only), and that no-args returns a login link. This complements the idempotentHint and non-destructive annotations without contradiction.
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 a single long sentence, slightly dense, but every clause carries essential information (config method, session method, no-arg behavior). It could be structured with bullet points, but remains efficient and readable.
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?
Given the minimal schema and no output schema, the description covers both login flows, token formats, and the no-argument behavior. The agent can correctly invoke the tool for either permanent or session authentication without 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 schema only defines 'token' as a string with no description, but the description fully explains it as the JWT pasted by the user, and clarifies that omitting the token triggers a link response. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage.
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 purpose: authenticating to MCP.AI for IDE agents. It specifies the exact process (log in, copy token) and the two invocation modes, making it distinct from sibling tools like 'connect' or 'marketplace'.
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?
Explicitly recommends the config header approach for a permanent, non-expiring connection and contrasts it with the session-only token paste method. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and prioritizes the best option.
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.
Tools are mostly distinct, but connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, and marketplace can invoke PEP queries that overlap with pep_consultar. This creates potential selection confusion, though descriptions help clarify.
Naming is inconsistent: mix of verbs (authenticate, connect), noun (marketplace), Portuguese (pep_consultar), and different snake_case patterns (report_bug vs toolkit_info). No uniform verb_noun structure.
Seven tools is a well-scoped count for a platform client with one domain-specific tool; each tool earns its place.
Covers authentication, connection status, marketplace operations, bug reporting, version, and toolkit state. For the PEP domain, it provides a single lookup tool, but the platform aspect is fairly complete. Minor gap: no tool for uninstalling/disconnecting beyond marketplace sub-actions.