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 cover readOnly=true and destructive=false. The description adds concrete behavioral detail not covered by annotations: the two possible states (all connected yields authenticated:true with empty pending[], missing credentials yields connect_url). This is valuable since there is no output schema to convey this.
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 concise sentences that front-load the essential purpose and then clarify the two distinct output states. No wasted words; every sentence 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 that there is no output schema and no parameters, the description covers the core behavior adequately, describing both normal and missing-credential cases. It could mention potential error handling or edge cases, but these are minor for a status check tool given the annotations.
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?
Tool has zero parameters, so the schema contains all that is needed. Per the rubric, a 0-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters and adds no redundant information.
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?
States a clear verb-resource pair: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' The description distinguishes this from siblings like 'authenticate' by specifying it returns status rather than performing authentication, so an agent can pick it without ambiguity.
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 its use case (checking connection status) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no direct exclusion or pointer to siblings like 'authenticate,' though the purpose is reasonably inferable.
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 protheus_* tool targets a distinct ERP entity or API, and descriptions explain the resource and key arguments, so an agent can usually pick the right one. The main ambiguities are the generic protheus_api, which overlaps with every dedicated reader, and the trio protheus_catalogo/protheus_diagnostico/protheus_modulos, all of which are about API/module availability.
The domain tools consistently use the protheus_ prefix in snake_case with a descriptive resource suffix, which is predictable once the pattern is recognized. There are minor deviations such as protheus_list_accounts using an English verb and the platform-level tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, show_version, toolkit_info) not following the protheus_ prefix at all.
32 tools is above the threshold where a tool list becomes heavy for agents to scan, even though the ERP domain is broad. The set could be split into a focused Protheus reader plus a platform-management server, or several entities could be combined behind parameterized tools.
The read-only surface covers a wide range of common Protheus areas (customers, products, stock, sales, production, pricing, CRM) and protheus_api with catalogo/diagnostico allows access to additional official/custom read routes. However, there are no create/update/delete tools at all, and major ERP areas such as financial movements and HR are absent, so mutation workflows dead-end in this server.