Returns the current toolkit state: installed MCPs, their connection status, the accounts connected to each one, and how many catalog tools each exposes.
| 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?
The description fully discloses what the tool returns (MCPs, connection status, accounts, catalog counts) and the annotations confirm it is read-only and idempotent. No side effects or unexpected behavior are hidden.
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, compact sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. It is well-structured and easy to parse.
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?
The description lists what is returned but does not specify the exact response format (e.g., JSON structure). However, since there is no output schema, this is acceptable. It provides enough context for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and output.
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 no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (since none exist). The description correctly avoids mentioning parameters, so there is nothing to clarify.
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 exactly states what the tool does: 'Returns the current toolkit state' and enumerates the specific details (installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, catalog tools). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'show_version' or 'authenticate' by focusing on toolkit-level introspection.
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 when you need to inspect the toolkit's MCP connections and accounts, but does not explicitly state 'use this when...'. It is clear enough for an agent to infer when to call it, though a more explicit conditional would be ideal.
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.