Retrieve complete bank account details by ID, including current balance and account information.
Detalhar conta bancária
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | ||
| kind | No | ||
| name | No | ||
| type | No | ||
| balance | No | ||
| default | No | ||
| archived | No | ||
| created_at | No | ||
| updated_at | No | ||
| description | No | ||
| institution_id | No | ||
| institution_name | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description only states the action of detailing an account and does not disclose read-only behavior, error conditions, permissions, or side effects. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and this is a significant gap.
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 appropriately concise, consisting of a single sentence with a clear subject and verb. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, respecting the agent's attention.
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?
Although the tool is simple and an output schema exists, the description lacks usage context, differentiation from getAccounts, and parameter clarification. The minimal description is insufficient for complete selection and invocation, especially with no annotations.
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 input schema defines an 'id' parameter but provides no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description likewise does not explain what the 'id' represents or how to provide it, failing to compensate for the missing schema information.
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 'Detalhar conta bancária' clearly specifies the action (detalhar/detail) and the resource (conta bancária/bank account). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like getAccounts (which lists accounts) and create/update/delete, which have different purposes.
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?
No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to call this tool versus getAccounts or other related tools, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent is left without context for appropriate selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SamuelMoraesF/mcp-organizze'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server