Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Anythink-MCP

Anythink-MCP

Official
by anythink-cloud
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

Sign in to a project directly

login_direct

Stores credentials directly for a project, bypassing billing login when you already have an org ID, API key, or JWT token.

Instructions

Store credentials directly for a project (bypasses billing login). Use this when you already have an org ID and API key or JWT token.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
orgIdYesOrganization/tenant ID
tokenNoJWT access token
apiKeyNoAPI key (ak_...)
baseUrlNoOverride API base URL
profileNoProfile name to save as (defaults to org ID)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.2.27
    • removedInput schema / description
      Removed value: -"Store credentials directly for a project (bypasses billing login). Use this when you already have an org ID and API key or JWT token."
    • changedInput schema / properties / apiKey / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / baseUrl / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / profile / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / token / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"login_direct"
  2. First observedv0.2.6

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=false, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It discloses that credentials are stored and billing login is bypassed, but says nothing about where credentials persist, whether an existing profile is overwritten, or what authentication/validation occurs.

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?

Two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core action and zero filler. Slightly terse for a credential-storing tool, but no wasted words.

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?

For a tool that writes persistent credentials with no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but omits operating details an agent would want: storage location, overwrite semantics, and success/failure behavior. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and all five parameters (orgId, token, apiKey, baseUrl, profile) are documented in the schema. The description only echoes org ID and API key/JWT, ignoring baseUrl and profile, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: store credentials for a project. The parenthetical 'bypasses billing login' gestures at how it differs from the plain login path, but it never names a sibling tool (login, login_google, signup) outright, so differentiation is only partial.

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?

'Use this when you already have an org ID and API key or JWT token' gives a clear precondition for selecting this tool. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use cases (e.g., use login_google for OAuth), so it is clear context without explicit routing.

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