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 (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) already cover safety profile, so the description adds value by describing the conditional behavior: returns authenticated:true and empty pending[] when connected, else returns connect_url. This provides concrete behavioral detail beyond annotations.
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, front-loaded with the primary purpose ('Returns connection status and URLs') and immediately provides conditional outcomes. No fluff, every sentence earns its place.
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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers both states (connected vs. missing credentials) and the key fields (authenticated, pending, connect_url). It is complete for a status-check tool, though it could mention if URLs differ per provider.
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 parametersholistically, and schema coverage is 100% (no parameters). Since the description explains output conditions thoroughly, it adds semantics for a tool with no inputs, matching the baseline for 0 parameters.
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 clearly states that the tool returns connection status and URLs, specifying details like 'authenticated:true' and empty 'pending[]' when connected. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on connection status, though it could be more explicit about differentiating from 'authenticate'.
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 implies usage: to check connection status and retrieve URLs when credentials are missing. It provides context on when different outputs occur (all providers connected vs. credentials missing), but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. 'authenticate' or 'toolkit_info', which are siblings.
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.
authenticate, connect, and toolkit_info all touch auth/connection status, so an agent must read carefully to pick the right one. The DETRAN query tool and marketplace are clearly distinct, but the platform helpers blur together.
Names mix bare verbs (authenticate, connect), noun phrases (marketplace, toolkit_info), and a Portuguese snake_case object-verb (detran_mt_veiculo_consultar). There is no consistent verb_noun or noun_verb convention across the set.
Seven tools is a reasonable number, but six are generic platform/meta helpers (auth, connect, marketplace, bug report, version, toolkit info) and only one is the named DETRAN vehicle domain. This makes the set feel padded and off-topic for a 'DETRAN MT: Veículo' server.
The core paid vehicle consultation flow is supported (authenticate, connect, market/checkout, consultar), so agents can complete a query. However, beyond that single query there are no other vehicle-domain operations (e.g., searching by different identifiers, listing query history, or checking credits), leaving the domain surface thin.