report_bug
Idempotent
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Íon MCP
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which align with reporting. The description adds that the conversation array is needed for reproduction, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. 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.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise with two sentences, no fluff. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured to list parameters.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple feedback tool with no output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers the core purpose but lacks details on the 'context' parameter and what happens after reporting (e.g., confirmation). It is minimally adequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions the 'conversation' parameter, ignoring 'message' (required) and 'context'. The description does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. It specifies the verb (report) and resource (bug/feedback), and given sibling tools are mostly openfinance or authentication, it stands out as a distinct feedback mechanism.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description advises including the conversation array for reproduction, which is useful context. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives, the sibling tools provide no similar functionality, making the usage context clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each openfinance tool targets a distinct resource/operation (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, sync, status), and the non-openfinance tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) are clearly separate. The only near-overlap is between openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, but the latter explicitly handles whole-connection consolidation and the descriptions clarify when to use each.
Naming Consistency5/5
All openfinance tools share the `openfinance_` prefix with a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_, get_, update_, force_sync, provider_status, search_). Non-openfinance tools use simple imperative verbs (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version) and the noun-phrase toolkit_info, all consistent in style with no mixed conventions.
Tool Count4/5
25 tools is on the high side, but each serves a distinct function within the comprehensive Open Finance domain (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, sync, status) plus general server utilities. The count is justified by the breadth of the domain, though it exceeds the typical 3-15 range.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers the full read lifecycle for financial data: listing and detail for accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, plus connection management (list, disconnect, force_sync), categories, and provider status. Missing write operations like transfers are likely out of scope, and minor gaps such as no separate 'get investment' detail are acceptable since list_investments returns comprehensive data.