Skip to main content
Glama

QI SCD MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_provider_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Checks the LIVE operational status of the Open Finance provider (its public status page) — this is the PROVIDER's health, separate from your own connection's openfinance_get_item_status. Use it whenever data looks incomplete or stale even though a connection shows UPDATED (accounts/transactions/balances missing, a bank not returning everything): it reveals an upstream outage or a known incident on a specific bank/connector, so you can tell a provider-side problem apart from a connection that just needs reconnecting. Returns the global indicator (none/minor/major/critical), degraded components, open incidents, and — when you have banks connected — flags the incidents that affect YOUR connected banks in your_banks_affected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds that the tool is 'LIVE', checks a public status page, and returns specific data: global indicator, degraded components, open incidents, and affected banks. This goes well beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four well-structured sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, differentiation, usage scenario, and return data. No fluff, front-loaded key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, the description fully explains return values (global indicator, components, incidents, your_banks_affected). Covers all needed context for a parameterless read-only tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist (0 params), so baseline is 4. The description correctly does not attempt to explain parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the action ('Checks'), the resource ('LIVE operational status of the Open Finance provider'), and explicitly differentiates from the sibling tool 'openfinance_get_item_status' by noting it checks provider health, not connection health.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit usage scenario: 'Use it whenever data looks incomplete or stale even though a connection shows UPDATED' and when to differentiate provider-side problems from connection issues. Also names an alternative tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All QI SCD MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct, especially within the openfinance_* group, with detailed descriptions covering specific resources and actions. Minor overlap exists between list_transactions and list_transactions_by_item, and between get_credit_card_bill and list_credit_card_bills, but the descriptions clearly delineate their use cases (per-account vs whole-connection, detail vs summary).

Naming Consistency4/5

The openfinance_* tools consistently follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_accounts, get_item_status, update_transaction_category), with the exception of openfinance_provider_status which uses a noun phrase. Non-openfinance tools like authenticate, connect, marketplace, and report_bug are less uniform but still readable. Overall, the convention is mostly consistent.

Tool Count4/5

At 25 tools, this is on the higher end but justified by the comprehensive Open Finance domain covering accounts, transactions, credit cards, loans, investments, connections, categories, and provider status. Each tool serves a specific operation, and the marketplace and platform utilities round out the surface. It's slightly heavy but not excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for Open Finance data: listing and detailing accounts, retrieving balances, managing transactions (including categorization), handling credit card bills (list and detail with transactions), loans, investments, and connection health (sync, status, disconnect, search). Also includes authentication, marketplace, and utility tools. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

Resources