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=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral detail by explaining the two possible return states (authenticated:true with empty pending[] vs. missing credentials returning connect_url), which is context beyond the 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?
Two sentences with no redundancy: the first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds conditional details. Information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior by describing both output scenarios. It is self-contained and leaves no significant gaps for such a simple tool.
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, so the schema is trivially complete. The description appropriately explains the tool's behavior without needing to document any parameters, earning the baseline score for no-parameter tools.
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 the specific verb 'Returns' and identifies the resource as 'connection status and URLs', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'authenticate' by focusing on status/URL retrieval rather than authentication actions.
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 clear context for when to use the tool: to check connection status and retrieve URLs. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'authenticate', but the conditional scenarios (all connected vs. missing credentials) imply the appropriate use case without being misleading.
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.