Skip to main content
Glama

FirmLedger

by ke.co.firmledger
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Manage my API keys

manage_api_keys
Destructive

Create an API key (the raw key is returned once), revoke a key, or change a key's scopes — the dashboard's Developer API controls. Requires the user's confirmation. Keys can also carry the AI-assistant scopes (read:account / write:account) that this connector uses.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNocreate: a name for the key.
actionYes
key_idNorevoke/update_scopes: the key id from list_api_keys.
scopesNoScope ids. Required for update_scopes; create defaults to the standard scopes.
key_prefixNoOptional alternative to key_id.
confirmation_tokenNoLeave empty on the first call: you get an action_summary and a token instead of the action. After the user explicitly confirms that summary, call again with the SAME arguments plus this token.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / scopes / description
      Previous value: -"create/update_scopes: scope ids (defaults to the standard read scopes)."New value: +"Scope ids. Required for update_scopes; create defaults to the standard scopes."
    • addedInput schema / properties / scopes / items / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "read:listings",
+  "write:listings",
+  "export",
+  "manage:webhooks",
+  "read:usage",
+  "read:account",
+  "write:account"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / scopes / minItems
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / scopes / uniqueItems
      Added value: +true
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior the annotations don't: the raw key is returned only once at creation, and the operation is gated on user confirmation.

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?

A single dense paragraph that front-loads the three actions, then the confirmation prerequisite, then the scope nuance. No filler, though the confirmation mechanism is restated from the confirmation_token schema description.

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?

For a non-idempotent, destructive, multi-action tool with no output schema, the description covers the confirmation gate, the one-time raw key disclosure, and the scope model. It could say more about revoke permanence or scope-change effects on existing integrations, but the essentials are present.

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?

Schema description coverage is already 83%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that keys can carry the AI-assistant scopes (read:account / write:account) used by this connector, which explains why those enum values exist.

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 names the resource (API keys) and enumerates the three concrete operations — create, revoke, change scopes — mapping directly to the action enum. It also implicitly separates itself from list_api_keys by framing the tool as the mutating counterpart to that listing tool.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition — the mutation requires the user's explicit confirmation — and contextualizes the tool as the dashboard's Developer API controls. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent to list_api_keys first to obtain key_id, leaving that inference to the schema description.

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

All FirmLedger toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources