Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bank File Tool Statement Review MCP

Bank File Tool Statement Review MCP

by Content-true
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get Bank File Tool links

get_official_links

Retrieve official converter, pricing, contact, and privacy page links for Bank File Tool so users can locate conversion and support information without uploading statements.

Instructions

Return official converter, pricing, contact, and privacy pages. This MCP server does not upload or convert statements.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_official_links"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does signal that the operation is purely informational and does no uploading or converting, which is real behavioral context. It stops short of disclosing what the response looks like (link list vs. rendered content), whether the set is fixed, or any network/auth caveats.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by a scope disclaimer that earns its place by preventing misuse. No filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema lookup tool, the description is nearly sufficient: it names the categories of links returned and disclaims processing behavior. The only gap is the concrete return shape, which is a minor omission at this complexity level.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. Baseline 4 applies; nothing is missing or contradicted.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('official converter, pricing, contact, and privacy pages'), so an agent knows it yields reference links rather than statement data. The phrasing 'pages' is a little loose about whether links or page content come back, but it is clearly distinguishable from siblings like reconcile_statement_totals.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for finding official resources. The line 'This MCP server does not upload or convert statements' usefully rules out a mistaken expectation, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to the sibling tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools