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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable detail about the exact contents of the returned state, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the key verb and object, and efficiently enumerates the included information without any wasted words. Every element 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?
For a simple read-only status tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully captures what is returned and is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call it. The read-only annotations complement the description well.
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?
With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, and no parameter documentation is needed. It appropriately describes what the tool will return.
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?
Uses a specific verb ('Returns') and clearly identifies the resource ('current toolkit state') with enumerated contents: installed MCPs, connection status, connected accounts, and catalog tool counts. This distinguishes it from siblings like show_version, connect, and marketplace.
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 makes the informational purpose clear, implying use when one needs to inspect toolkit state, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or list exclusions. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.
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 platform tools have clear roles, but there is overlap between connect, toolkit_info, and marketplace—all deal with connection/installation status to some degree. The single domain tool is clearly distinct, but the marketplace's broad scope creates potential confusion.
Tool names mix English and Portuguese verbs/nouns (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info, sancoes_suica_consultar) with no consistent pattern. Some are camelCase, some lowercase, and one uses a Portuguese verb phrase.
Seven tools is within a reasonable range, but six are generic platform utilities unrelated to the server's stated sanctions domain. This makes the set feel bloated for its intended purpose and dilutes the domain focus.
For the Swiss sanctions domain, only a single query tool exists—it checks names but provides no other operations like listing all sanctions or retrieving detailed entry information. The platform tools are comprehensive but irrelevant to the domain, leaving the sanctions surface minimal.