Returns the current toolkit state: installed MCPs, their connection status, the accounts connected to each one, and how many catalog tools each exposes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context about the specific content of the state (installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, catalog tool counts), which goes beyond what annotations provide and helps the agent understand exactly what information is available.
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 is front-loaded with the main verb and purpose. Every clause adds specific detail about the returned state, with no filler or repetition. It is both concise and informative.
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?
With no parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining what the tool returns. It does so thoroughly by listing all four components of the toolkit state, making it complete for an agent to understand the tool's behavior and expected output.
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, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because the description fully compensates by explaining the output, which is the only thing an agent needs to know.
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 a specific verb ('Returns') and names a precise resource ('current toolkit state'), then enumerates exactly what is included: installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, and catalog tool counts. This fully distinguishes it from siblings like show_version, which is about version rather than the full state.
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 clearly states what the tool returns, making it obvious that it should be used when a user needs an overview of the toolkit's MCP connections and accounts. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
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 have clear, distinct purposes (authenticate, cvm_consultar, show_version), but connect and toolkit_info overlap in reporting connection status, and marketplace is a catch-all with many sub-actions (search, describe, invoke, install, list_tools, subscribe, etc.) that could be confused with separate tools like report_bug. Descriptions help, but boundaries are not always crisp.
Tool names follow no consistent pattern: some are verbs (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version), some are nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and one uses snake_case with a Portuguese verb (cvm_consultar). Mixed conventions and unclear verb/noun styles make the set feel inconsistent.
With 7 tools, the count is reasonable and not bloated. However, marketplace is an extremely large tool packing many capabilities, effectively expanding the surface. Still, the overall number is appropriate for a platform server that mixes marketplace functionality with a single domain query.
The server covers authentication, connection status, marketplace search/run/install/billing, bug reporting, version info, and toolkit state. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit logout or account/profile management), but for its apparent purpose, the surface is largely complete and workable.