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 declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail about response states, including authenticated:true, empty pending[], and connect_url behavior, which goes beyond the annotations.
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 core function, and every phrase adds meaning. It efficiently covers the main purpose and key conditional outcomes without unnecessary detail.
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?
With no output schema, the description fully explains the relevant return values for both connection scenarios. The zero-parameter tool is simple, and the description provides enough context for an agent to know what to expect from the response.
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 schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden to compensate. The baseline of 4 applies because parameter semantics are not applicable and the description still clarifies the return behavior.
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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'authenticate' by focusing on status reporting rather than authentication actions.
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 clear context about when different results occur ('When all providers are connected...' vs 'When credentials are missing...'), which implies usage for checking connection state. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the read-only status-check context is evident.
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 tool serves a distinct purpose: authenticate handles login, connect reports status, marketplace is the central hub for searching and executing MCPs, report_bug sends feedback, show_version displays versions, sintegra_ms_consultar performs a specific data lookup, and toolkit_info summarizes the environment. The only potential overlap is between authenticate and connect, but they are clearly separated by actions (login vs. check status). The marketplace tool is broad but has a well-defined scope, so misselection is unlikely.
Naming is mixed: some tools use verb_noun (show_version, toolkit_info), some are single verbs (authenticate, connect), and marketplace is a noun. Additionally, sintegra_ms_consultar includes a proper name and a Portuguese verb, deviating from the pattern. While all names are readable, the inconsistency is noticeable and could confuse agents expecting a uniform convention.
Seven tools is a reasonable count for a platform that combines a marketplace, user management, and a specific data query. The count is not excessive and each tool seems necessary, though the marketplace tool bundles many sub-actions (search, describe, invoke, list, install, subscribe, etc.) into one surface, which might justify a higher count but still remains within a sensible range.
The platform covers core operations: authentication, connection status, marketplace discovery/execution, bug reporting, version info, and toolkit state. Minor gaps exist, such as a dedicated logout or token revocation function, but the marketplace tool includes billing and subscription management, so most needs are met. The SINTEGRA MS tool is a standalone query, which is complete for its purpose.