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 mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail by specifying exact return states: authenticated:true with empty pending[] when connected, and connect_url plus per-install URLs when credentials are missing. This explains output logic beyond the annotation basics.
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 long, opens with the core purpose, and each sentence contributes distinct information—the general result and conditional states. There is no redundancy or filler.
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 zero-parameter, read-only status tool without an output schema, the description covers the primary response scenarios and key fields. It explains what happens under full connectivity and missing credentials, giving an agent sufficient understanding of expected behavior.
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 correctly omits parameter details since the input schema is empty and fully covered, and no parameter explanation is needed.
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 begins with 'Returns connection status and URLs', a specific verb and resource. It clearly establishes the tool as a status checker, differentiating it from sibling tools like 'authenticate' and 'toolkit_info' by its focus on current connection state and associated URLs.
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 provides behavioral context by detailing outcomes under two conditions (all providers connected vs. missing credentials). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, so usage guidance remains implicit rather than direct.
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 distinct purposes, but there is potential confusion between the marketplace (which can also run CPF/CNPJ queries by invoking external MCPs) and the dedicated sintegra_ccc_completa_consultar tool. Additionally, connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, which may cause mis-selection.
Naming is highly inconsistent: some tools are bare verbs (authenticate, connect), one is a noun (marketplace), others are verb_noun with underscores (report_bug, show_version), and the Sintegra tool is a long domain-specific phrase with the verb at the end. There is no discernible pattern across the set.
At 7 tools, the count is within a reasonable range. However, the server's name implies a Sintegra-focused tool, while most tools are generic platform features; still, each tool appears to have a distinct function and the count is not excessive.
The core Sintegra consultation is covered by a single comprehensive query tool. Platform-level tools for authentication, connection status, marketplace access, and version reporting round out the surface. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool for managing or reviewing past consultations, but these are likely handled through the marketplace.