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 declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which align with the described read-only status check. The description adds valuable context about conditional return values: authenticated:true with empty pending[] when all connected, and connect_url when credentials missing, going beyond the 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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, no redundancy. Each sentence adds specific state-conditioned detail.
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?
The description covers both main states (all connected vs missing credentials) and mentions key return fields (authenticated, pending[], connect_url). For a stateless read-only tool with no output schema, this is sufficiently complete, though it could clarify what 'per-install URLs' refers to.
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 zero parameters, the schema is trivially covered. The description correctly omits parameter details; no additional meaning 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 clearly states the tool 'Returns connection status and URLs,' a specific read-only resource. It differentiates from the sibling 'authenticate' by focusing on status rather than action.
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 explains the tool's behavior conditional on connection state, implying use for checking status. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs authenticate or other siblings, nor does it mention alternatives.
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.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: authentication, connection status, marketplace operations, DAP query, bug reporting, version info, and toolkit overview. Even the marketplace tool, while broad, is explicitly framed as the meta-catalog and runner, so there's no confusion with the other tools.
Tool names mix conventions: some are verbs (authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version), some are nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and one is a domain-specific compound (mda_sead_dap_consultar). There's no consistent verb_noun or noun pattern across the set, making it harder to predict naming for similar operations.
7 tools is a reasonable number for a platform management server managing authentication, marketplace access, and environment info. The marketplace tool is large but justified as the central catalog/enabler. The count is slightly on the high side for such a niche purpose, but it remains coherent.
The set covers the core platform operations: authentication, connection status, capability discovery/execution, bug reporting, and versioning. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit credential management or billing history outside marketplace), but agents can accomplish main workflows without dead ends.