Returns connection status and URLs. When all providers are connected, returns authenticated:true and empty pending[]. When credentials are missing, returns connect_url for the toolkit and per-install URLs.
| 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 non-destructive behavior, so the description adds value by explaining the conditional output states, including authenticated:true, pending[], and connect_url. It goes beyond the annotation metadata without contradicting it.
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 two sentences and front-loads the core action in the first sentence. Every clause contributes meaningful guidance about the tool's return behavior.
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?
For a simple, zero-parameter, read-only tool with rich annotations, the description covers the main expected return states and missing-credential behavior. It does not spell out partial-connection output, but the tool's low complexity and strong annotation support keep the burden low.
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 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns connection status and URLs.' It clearly distinguishes the tool as a status/read check, which differentiates it from the sibling 'authenticate' tool.
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 provides clear contextual states ('when all providers are connected' vs 'when credentials are missing'), which effectively tells the agent when this tool is relevant. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like 'authenticate' or state when not to use it.
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 platform tools are mostly distinguishable, but 'authenticate' and 'connect' have overlapping auth/connection concerns, and 'marketplace' bundles many unrelated capabilities into one oversized tool. The single DETRAN domain tool is clear, but the surrounding meta-tools make the server's purpose ambiguous.
Naming mixes styles and languages: verb-only names like 'connect' and 'authenticate', English noun names like 'marketplace' and 'toolkit_info', and Portuguese snake_case like 'detran_ba_multas_consultar'. There is no consistent verb_noun or naming convention across the set.
Seven tools is not inherently excessive, but six of them are generic platform-management utilities unrelated to the DETRAN BA Multas domain. The server effectively offers only one domain tool, making the count misleading and poorly scoped for its stated purpose.
The only domain operation is consulting DETRAN BA fines, with no broader fine lifecycle coverage such as payment, dispute, or vehicle-related queries. The remaining tools address platform infrastructure rather than filling domain gaps, so the server is severely incomplete as a DETRAN-oriented tool surface.