MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.): log in in the browser, copy the access token. Best: add it to this server's config as a header Authorization: Bearer <token> for a permanent, non-expiring connection. Or paste it here for a session-only login: call with { token: "" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | No |
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?
Discloses that token establishes a session and config provides permanent auth. Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive, which aligns. No contradictions.
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?
Somewhat conversational and longer than needed; multiple sentences contain repeated info. Could be more concise, but front-loaded with key points.
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?
Covers both usage scenarios, parameter meaning, and desired outcome. No output schema needed. Complete for a simple auth tool.
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?
With 0% schema coverage, description compensates by explaining the 'token' parameter is a JWT from browser login. Could add format details, but sufficient.
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?
Description clearly defines the tool's purpose: authenticate by either providing a JWT token for session login or calling with no args to get a login link. It's specific and distinct from sibling tools like connect or marketplace.
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?
Explains two usage modes (permanent config vs session token) and when to use each (no args for link). Could be clearer about when not to use, but context is sufficient.
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.
The openfinance_* cluster maps cleanly to distinct resources/actions and the descriptions sharply separate lookalikes like openfinance_get_item_status vs openfinance_provider_status. A few boundaries are fuzzy: openfinance_list_transactions_by_item overlaps with openfinance_list_transactions, marketplace also exposes report_bug alongside the standalone report_bug tool, and get_account_balance/list_accounts both return balances.
The 20 finance tools consistently follow openfinance_<verb>_<noun> (list_accounts, get_credit_card_bill, force_sync, update_transaction_category), which is the dominant pattern. The five platform tools break it with bare verbs and nouns (connect, marketplace, toolkit_info, show_version), creating a clear but minor namespace split.
25 tools is at the heavy end of the typical range, but the server covers two substantial domains (Open Finance data and an MCP marketplace/platform), so most tools earn their place. There is little redundant surface; the only mild overreach is marketplace smuggling many sub-operations into one tool.
The Open Finance surface is remarkably complete: accounts, balances, transactions, credit card bills, loans, investments, categories, connection health, force sync, connector search, and disconnect. Minor gaps remain, such as no direct programmatic bank-connection creation tool (URLs are returned instead) and no singular transaction/get-investment-detail endpoint, but agents can work around these.