Skip to main content
Glama

Woop MCP

openfinance_get_item_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the current status of a bank connection (UPDATED, UPDATING, LOGIN_ERROR, etc.), its executionStatus, connector metadata, and a reconnect_url that reopens the widget in UPDATE mode for that connection (re-authenticate / enter MFA token in place, without disconnecting and without consuming a connection slot). Omit item to get the status of ALL linked banks at once (returns { count, items }); pass item for a single bank.

Bulk support: accepts item_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemNo
item_idNo
item_idsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_ids
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
  4. Added
  5. Removed
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is clearly safe and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations, such as the reconnect_url behavior (reopens widget in UPDATE mode without disconnecting or consuming a slot) and the bulk support behavior. This adds transparency about side effects and capabilities.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, with two sentences that convey the core functionality, usage distinction, and bulk support. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose. Slightly more structure (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability, but it remains efficient and informative.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description provides essential details about the returned data (count, items, reconnect_url) and the tool's behavior. The annotations cover safety and idempotency. However, it could mention that the response includes executionStatus and connector metadata explicitly. Still, it is sufficient for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that `item` is for a single bank, `item_ids` for batched execution, and omitting `item` returns all banks. However, the parameter `item_id` (singular) is present in the schema but not mentioned in the description, which is a minor gap. Overall, it adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states the tool returns the current status of a bank connection with specific statuses like UPDATED, UPDATING, LOGIN_ERROR, and distinguishes between single and bulk operations (omit `item` for all, pass `item` for one). It also mentions executionStatus, connector metadata, and reconnect_url, making the purpose very clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear guidance on when to use `item` vs omitting it, and mentions bulk support with `item_ids`. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or compare it to sibling tools like openfinance_list_connections, which could be confusing. Still, the usage context is well explained.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools have overlapping purviews—list_transactions vs list_transactions_by_item, get_credit_card_bill vs list_credit_card_bills, and connect vs list_connections vs get_item_status vs provider_status—so an agent could pick the wrong one. The very detailed descriptions disambiguate them, but the tool names alone do not.

Naming Consistency3/5

The openfinance_ prefix provides a clear family and most members use list_/get_/update_ verbs, but there are deviations like openfinance_provider_status (no verb), openfinance_disconnect_bank, and openfinance_force_sync. Platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, toolkit_info) follow a different, less uniform style.

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, this sits at the top of the heavy range. Most Open Finance operations are justified given the breadth of banking data, but overlapping tools and the mega-marketplace tool with many sub-actions make the set feel slightly bloated.

Completeness5/5

The Open Finance surface covers list/get/update/disconnect/sync for accounts, transactions, credit card bills, loans, and investments, plus provider health, connection search, and platform-level auth, marketplace, version, and feedback. There are no obvious dead ends or missing lifecycle operations.