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 and idempotentHint=true. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations by detailing the response in two key states: when all providers are connected (returns authenticated:true and empty pending[]) and when credentials are missing (returns connect_url and per-install URLs). This clarifies the dynamic behavior without contradicting the safety hints.
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, concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every clause adds value by explaining the two primary outcomes, making it efficient with no fluff or repetition.
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?
With no output schema, the description serves as the primary source for return values. It covers the main scenarios (all connected, credentials missing) and mentions key fields (authenticated, pending[], connect_url, per-install URLs). It may not exhaustively list all possible states, but for a simple status tool, it is sufficiently complete.
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 there are no parameter semantics to explain. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate. The description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps since the schema is empty and fully described.
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: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' It specifies the resource (connection status) and the verb (returns), and distinguishes it from siblings like authenticate by focusing on status rather than the action of connecting. The description also provides concrete details about return values under different conditions, making the purpose unambiguous.
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 by explaining what happens when providers are connected vs. credentials missing, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like authenticate or provide any exclusion criteria. There is no mention of 'use this if' or 'instead of', so guidance is only implied.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, causing slight overlap. The domain-specific protestos_sp_consultar is unique and well-separated from the platform utilities.
Naming is inconsistent: one-word verbs (authenticate, connect), a noun (marketplace), an English verb_noun (report_bug, show_version), a noun_noun (toolkit_info), and a Portuguese compound (protestos_sp_consultar). No unifying pattern is evident.
Seven tools is within a reasonable range, but the server name suggests a specialized domain while only one tool is domain-specific. The other six are generic platform utilities, making the composition feel unbalanced for the stated theme.
The domain tool provides the core query capability, and the marketplace tool enables discovery and invocation of additional MCPs, covering many potential gaps. However, the domain-specific surface itself is minimal with no supplementary operations like reporting or export.