Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
slidecold-mcp

slidecold-mcp

by slidecold
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Submit a 2FA code

verify_account_2fa

Submit a 2FA code to continue an account login that requires two-factor authentication, using the identifier and partial session from the login job result.

Instructions

Submit a 2FA code. Required API key scope: accounts:write. POST /accounts/verify-2fa Continues a login that required two-factor auth. identifier and partialSession come from the login job result. Malformed bodies yield 500.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "verify_account_2fa"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesJSON request body.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the required API key scope (accounts:write), the underlying POST route, and a real failure mode ('Malformed bodies yield 500'). That is meaningful operational context the annotations do not convey, and nothing contradicts readOnlyHint=false or idempotentHint=false. It does not say what success establishes (e.g. a live session) or whether codes expire.

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?

Five short lines, front-loaded with the action, then auth scope, route, usage context, and the error caveat. No filler or redundancy; each line carries distinct information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-body mutation with no output schema, it covers purpose, prerequisite flow, required scope, and one failure mode, with annotations supplying the safety profile. It stops short of describing the success outcome (whether a full session is returned) or code lifetime/retry behavior, which an agent handling a 2FA step would benefit from.

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?

Schema coverage is nominally 100% but the nested properties (code, username, proxyId, partialSession) carry no field descriptions. The description compensates by explaining the provenance of `identifier` and `partialSession` (the login job result), which is the key thing an agent must get right. `proxyId` and the contents of `partialSession` remain unexplained.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Submit a 2FA code') and adds that it 'Continues a login that required two-factor auth,' which separates it from siblings like get_login_status or relogin_account. It does not explicitly name the nearest alternative (verify_account_challenge), so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

It tells the agent exactly when this applies ('continues a login that required two-factor auth') and constrains the inputs by saying `identifier` and `partialSession` come from the login job result. No explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative (e.g. verify_account_challenge) is given, so it falls short of a 5.

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