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 meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations by explaining the exact conditional return states: authenticated:true with empty pending[] when connected, and connect_url with per-install URLs when credentials are missing. This gives an agent useful expectations about the response without contradicting 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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides essential conditional details in the following sentences. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with 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?
Given the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and rich annotations, the description is complete for an agent to invoke it correctly. It explains both primary outcomes and the relevant returned fields, which is sufficient since there is no output schema and the tool has no complex inputs.
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, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description adds relevant context about the returned status fields even though no parameters exist.
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 a specific verb and resource: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' It also specifies conditional outcomes, such as returning authenticated:true when all providers are connected and connect_url when credentials are missing. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from the sibling tool authenticate, leaving some ambiguity about scope.
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 implies this tool is for checking connection status and retrieving URLs, and it gives conditional behavior for connected vs. missing-credential states. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus authenticate or other siblings, nor does it mention when not to use it. The usage context is implied rather than explicit.
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.
The stone_vendas_* tools are clearly separated by data type, but the generic tools are not: connect, toolkit_info, and marketplace all describe connection/installed-tool state, and marketplace even mentions report_bug functionality that is also a standalone tool. Agents could easily pick the wrong meta-tool when checking status or running another MCP.
The Stone tools share a consistent stone_vendas_ prefix, but the rest of the server uses bare English verbs/nouns like authenticate, connect, marketplace, and toolkit_info. Inside the prefix, the names mix verbs like listar and limpar_cache with nouns like arquivo, recebiveis, and resumo, so no single naming pattern governs the set.
15 tools is not extreme, and the nine Stone-specific tools are reasonably scoped. However, six generic MCP.AI/admin tools are unrelated to Stone Vendas and dilute the server's purpose, making the count feel padded.
The Stone domain covers the main reconciliation workflow well: sales, Pix, settlements, receivables, cancellations/chargebacks, account listing, a catch-all daily file, and cache reset. There are minor gaps like a direct single-transaction lookup or an explicit bank-statement reconciliation tool, but core reporting has no dead ends.