Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
sparebank1-mcp

sparebank1-mcp

by MrLightful
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Check bank connection

sb1_check_connection
Read-onlyIdempotent

Verifies bank authentication through the documented Hello World endpoint, confirming the connection is ready before accessing accounts, balances, or transactions.

Instructions

Verify bank authentication using the documented Hello World endpoint.

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": "sb1_check_connection"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond the title: it does not say what is actually verified, what a failed result implies, whether credentials must already be configured, or what side effects (if any) occur on the remote bank.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb. It is efficient, though the trailing 'documented Hello World endpoint' clause adds ambiguity rather than information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a verification tool the description should at least say what outcome counts as success and how this differs from sb1_auth_status — that ambiguity is the main gap an agent would hit at call time.

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, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for; baseline 4 applies. Schema description coverage is reported at 100% with an empty properties object.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The verb 'Verify' plus 'bank authentication' gives a rough sense of purpose, but the phrase 'the documented Hello World endpoint' is opaque and suggests a sandbox smoke test rather than a real auth check. It also fails to distinguish itself from the sibling sb1_auth_status, which appears to cover the same ground.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to call this versus sb1_auth_status or any other sibling, and no preconditions or exclusions are stated. The agent is left to guess whether this is a health check, a live credential validation, or a placeholder.

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