Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CASDA MCP Server

CASDA MCP Server

by jbwod
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Get CASDA authentication status

casda_get_auth_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Report whether credentials are configured and currently authenticate to CASDA, without revealing secret material.

Instructions

Report whether credentials are configured and currently authenticate to CASDA.

Never returns username, password, or other secret material.

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": "casda_get_auth_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
provenanceNo
authenticatedYes
credentials_configuredYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the important behavioral detail that it never returns secrets, which is valuable context not provided by annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences, the first stating the purpose and the second adding a safety note. Every sentence is necessary and there is no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a parameterless tool with a read-only, idempotent function and an output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is reported and assures security. No additional context seems necessary.

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 has no parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100%. According to the guidelines, a baseline of 4 applies; the description appropriately does not need to add parameter information.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states that the tool reports whether credentials are configured and authenticate to CASDA. This is a specific verb-resource pair that uniquely identifies its function among the many sibling tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied by the name and description, but there is no mention of prerequisites or situations where another tool might be more appropriate.

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