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 and idempotentHint. The description adds conditional behavior (authenticated:true with empty pending[] when all providers connected, connect_url when credentials missing), which is useful beyond the annotations. It does not cover partial-connection states, leaving some gaps.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and conditional details. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.
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 explains two primary scenarios but omits partial-connection cases and doesn't elaborate on the structure of URLs or pending[] beyond what's mentioned. Given no output schema, this leaves some ambiguity about the full set of possible responses.
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?
There are zero parameters, so the description has no parameter burden. Per the rubric, 0 params yields a baseline of 4.
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 it 'Returns connection status and URLs' and specifies conditional behavior for all-providers-connected vs. missing credentials, making it distinct from sibling tools like 'authenticate' or 'show_version'.
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 is for checking connection status, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool. Siblings like 'authenticate' obviously have a different purpose, but the comparison is left implicit.
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 marketplace tool is a catch-all that subsumes many operations (search, invoke, install, report bug, prompts), creating overlap with the standalone report_bug tool and making it unclear when to use which. authenticate and connect both deal with authentication/connection status, causing potential selection confusion.
Tool names exhibit no consistent pattern: some are bare verbs (authenticate, connect), some verb-noun (report_bug, show_version), some nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and one is a Portuguese phrase (tcu_inidoneo_consultar). The mix of languages and conventions makes the set feel chaotic.
Seven tools is within a reasonable range and each has a distinct surface area, though the marketplace tool is extremely overloaded with functionality. The count itself is appropriate for a platform server, but the heavy concentration of capabilities in one tool reduces the effective granularity.
The core domain operation (tcu_inidoneo_consultar) is present, and the platform tools cover authentication, connection status, bug reporting, and version info. However, the server's stated purpose is TCU-related, yet most tools are generic platform utilities, leaving the domain surface thin. Missing operations like listing prior consultations or managing query history are not covered.