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 indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds value by explaining the exact response states: authenticated:true with empty pending[] when all connected, and connect_url plus per-install URLs when credentials are missing. This provides behavioral transparency beyond the schema.
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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds meaningful detail about return values. There is no redundancy or waste.
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 covers the two main states (all connected, missing credentials) but does not specify partial connectivity or error cases. Given the tool's simplicity and zero parameters, this is mostly complete, but a slight gap remains for mixed states.
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, and the schema is empty. The description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description correctly omits parameter details since there are none.
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 distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'authenticate' by focusing on status and URLs rather than initiating authentication. The conditional behavior for all connected vs. missing credentials adds specificity.
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 gives clear context on when to use the tool: to check if all providers are connected or to get connection URLs when credentials are missing. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the conditions imply the use case clearly.
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 clear purposes, but 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' both report connection status, and 'marketplace' subsumes listing tools which overlaps with 'toolkit_info'. These overlapping responsibilities could cause an agent to select the wrong tool.
Tool names are inconsistent: some are bare verbs (connect, authenticate), some use verb_noun (report_bug, show_version), some are noun phrases (toolkit_info, marketplace), and one is a long Portuguese phrase (similaridade_ar_consultar). No coherent pattern.
7 tools is a reasonable count, but the set mixes generic platform management (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) with a single domain-specific query tool, which makes it feel slightly over-scoped for the apparent purpose of identity similarity.
The platform side covers auth, status, marketplace search/invoke, bug reporting, version info, and toolkit state, so it is fairly complete. The domain side has only a consult operation, but that matches the simple query nature of the service, so no major gaps.