Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MYOB Codex MCP

MYOB Codex MCP

by jaeko44
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

myob_oauth_authorize

Start MYOB OAuth authorization to securely connect your MYOB account. Choose automatic browser open or manual mode for control.

Instructions

Alias for myob_oauth_authorize_business.

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": "myob_oauth_authorize"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
manualNo
open_browserNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It reveals nothing about side effects, permissions, OAuth flow behavior, or any other behavioral traits. The alias statement alone provides no transparency into the tool's actual operations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise in form. However, it is under-specified and lacks substantive information, so it doesn't fully earn its place. It provides minimal value beyond the tool name, but it does reference a specific sibling, which is some content.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For an OAuth authorization tool with two boolean parameters and no output schema, the description is drastically incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's purpose, the authorization flow, parameter effects, or any return values. Given the complexity of OAuth operations, this is completely inadequate.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not mention or explain any parameters. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the meaning of 'manual' and 'open_browser' entirely unclear.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description merely states it is an alias for another tool without specifying what the tool actually does. It lacks a clear verb+resource description and does not distinguish itself from siblings beyond referencing one. This is only slightly better than a tautology, as it doesn't explain the underlying function.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The alias reference implies interchangeability with myob_oauth_authorize_business, but that's not actionable guidance.

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