get_settingsGet your Notipo account configuration: which services are connected (Notion, WordPress), current plan, feature settings, and trigger statuses.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| plan | Yes | FREE | TRIAL | PRO | |
| wpSeoPlugin | Yes | RANK_MATH | YOAST | SEOPRESS | AIOSEO | |
| codeHighlighter | Yes | ||
| notionConnected | Yes | ||
| wordpressConnected | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark this as readOnly and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying what configuration data is returned, including service connections and trigger statuses, which goes beyond the annotation's simple safety hint.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource before listing the specific configuration items. It contains no filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given that the tool takes no parameters and has an output schema available, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and the nature of its result. It does not omit any critical usage information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters and the schema shows no required inputs, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description focuses on the output, which is appropriate for a parameterless read operation; the baseline for 0 params is 4.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'Notipo account configuration' and enumerates the returned content (connected services, plan, feature settings, trigger statuses). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on posts, jobs, and publishing.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description makes the tool's purpose obvious by listing its contents, so an agent can infer it should be used when the user asks about account configuration or connected services. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling context makes the usage clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target clearly distinct resources and actions, separating creation, updates, deletions, list/get operations, and job monitoring. The main ambiguity is between direct_publish and publish_post, since both involve publishing, though their descriptions clarify creation vs. making a draft live.
The majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern: create_post, get_post, list_posts, update_post, delete_post, publish_post, list_categories, list_tags. The exceptions are direct_publish and sync_now, which deviate from the pattern but remain understandable.
13 tools is well-scoped for a blogging and sync workflow covering posts, publishing, jobs, categories, tags, and settings. Each tool addresses a distinct part of the pipeline without redundancy or excessive granularity.
The surface covers the core post lifecycle, publishing jobs, sync triggers, WordPress metadata, and settings. The only notable gap is that direct_publish creates a WordPress post outside of Notion, while update_post explicitly syncs back from Notion, so updating a direct-published post may not be covered.