Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Nano-Banana MCP Server

Nano-Banana MCP Server

by fjacquet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_configuration_status

Check whether a Gemini API token is configured so you can verify setup before generating or editing images.

Instructions

Check if Gemini API token is configured

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_configuration_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.3.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Check' adequately implies a non-mutating operation, but the description says nothing about what the check actually returns (boolean, status string, error on missing token) and there is no output schema to fall back on.

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 with the object of the check front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification of the result rather than deliberate economy.

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?

A zero-parameter read check is a simple tool, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only place the return value could be explained and it is not. An agent knows what is being checked but not what to expect back or how a negative result is surfaced.

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 disambiguate. The baseline of 4 applies; no parameter-level meaning is missing.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('Check') and a specific resource state ('Gemini API token is configured'), which clearly separates it from the sibling configure_gemini_token. It stops short of naming that sibling, but the read-vs-write split is obvious from the wording.

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 a pre-flight check before generate_image or edit_image. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention that configure_gemini_token is the remedy when the check fails, and no stated prerequisites.

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