Returns the current toolkit state: installed MCPs, their connection status, the accounts connected to each one, and how many catalog tools each exposes.
| 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 indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context by detailing exactly what the returned state includes, which is beyond the annotation's boolean hints. It also implies no side effects, consistent with 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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the core function and lists specific return items. Every word contributes value, and 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 read-only informational tool with no parameters and a clear output description, the description is complete. It fully explains what the agent will receive, and the sibling tools are so distinct that no further disambiguation is needed.
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 the description needs to add no parameter-level meaning. The schema is empty with 100% coverage, and the baseline for zero parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate.
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 returns the current toolkit state, enumerating specific content (installed MCPs, connection status, connected accounts, catalog tool counts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like authenticate, connect, and show_version, which handle different concerns.
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 defines a clear scope (current toolkit state), making it obvious when to invoke it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the sibling tools are sufficiently different that no exclusions are necessary.
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.
Several platform-management tools overlap in purpose: authenticate and connect both deal with connection state, while show_version and toolkit_info both return platform status. The marketplace tool is an overloaded catch-all that handles searching, invoking, installing, and billing, making it unclear when to use it versus the other tools.
Naming conventions are mixed: some tools follow verb_noun patterns (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version), while others are bare nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info). Additionally, the only domain-specific tool uses Portuguese (veiculo_nacional_consultar) while the rest use English, creating a language inconsistency.
The server is named 'Consulta Veicular Nacional' and appears focused on vehicle lookup, yet only 1 of 7 tools actually performs that function. The other 6 are generic platform utilities unrelated to the stated purpose, making the tool count feel bloated and off-target for the server's apparent scope.
For the core domain of vehicle consultation, the single tool veiculo_nacional_consultar provides the essential lookup-by-plate capability with no obvious missing operations. Since it is a read-only public data consultation, CRUD coverage is unnecessary, and the vehicle-related surface appears complete. The extra platform tools do not fill any domain-specific gap.