MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.): log in in the browser, copy the access token. Best: add it to this server's config as a header Authorization: Bearer <token> for a permanent, non-expiring connection. Or paste it here for a session-only login: call with { token: "" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | No |
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 indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true; the description adds context by explaining the token's non-expiring nature via header config versus session-only login when passed directly. It does not fully describe side effects like token storage, but the key behavioral distinction is clear.
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 compact and well-structured, using 'Best:' and 'Or' to separate permanent and session-based flows. Every sentence adds a necessary detail: context, permanent option, session option, and call syntax.
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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main invocation patterns, the difference between permanent and session authentication, and the no-args behavior. It does not explicitly state what the tool returns when a token is provided, but this is a minor gap for an authentication tool.
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 input schema only defines 'token' as a plain string with no description. The description explains that token is an optional JWT pasted after browser login, and that omitting it triggers a link-returning flow. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.
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: authenticate an IDE agent by logging in through the browser and obtaining an access token. It distinguishes between permanent header-based configuration and session-only token login, which differentiates it from siblings like 'connect'.
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?
It provides explicit guidance: 'Best: add it to this server's config as a header' for permanent access, or 'paste it here for a session-only login.' It also explains when to call with no args (to get the link) and with a token (after pasting), covering both primary usage modes.
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 are systematically distinct (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.), but the marketplace tool bundles many sub-actions that overlap with standalone tools like report_bug and with authentication concerns. The single CNDT tool is clearly different, yet the mix of platform management and domain-specific tools can cause confusion about intended usage.
Names mix single verbs, noun phrases, and a prefixed 'tst_' among the domain tool, with no consistent verb_noun pattern. This is further complicated by 'marketplace' being a noun while others like 'connect' and 'authenticate' are verbs.
Seven tools falls within the recommended range, but the majority are generic platform utilities that seem unrelated to the CNDT (labor debt certificate) purpose. One domain-specific tool and six platform tools suggests the count is more about platform infrastructure than the server's stated mission.
The CNDT workflow is covered by a single query tool, and the supporting tools for authentication and payment exist, so basic usage is possible. However, there is no history, batch query, or administrative functionality, and the platform tools do not directly enhance the CNDT domain, leaving a thin surface for the server's apparent purpose.