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 a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavior context by describing the response structure in both connected and missing credentials states, which goes beyond what annotations provide.
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 extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the main purpose. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.
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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It adequately explains the return behavior and different states, which is sufficient for this simple tool.
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 input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies when there are 0 parameters, and no additional parameter details are 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, with specific detail on two states (all connected vs. missing credentials). It is specific and covers the resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like '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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (to check connection status) and what to expect in different scenarios. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternative tools.
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 tools are mostly distinct, covering authentication, marketplace navigation, Open Finance data retrieval (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments), and status/connector management. Some overlap exists between openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item (both return transactions, but the latter is a consolidated summary), which could cause momentary confusion, though descriptions clearly differentiate them.
Tool names follow a clear pattern: 'openfinance_' prefix for Open Finance operations, with consistent verb_noun structure (list_accounts, get_account_balance, update_transaction_category). However, there are a few outliers like 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', 'report_bug', and 'show_version' that don't follow the Open Finance naming convention, though they serve different purposes and are still readable.
With 25 tools, the count is slightly high but justifiable given the broad scope: the server covers Open Finance banking data (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections), marketplace operations, and system utilities. Not all tools are used in every session, but each serves a distinct purpose, and the count remains manageable due to clear grouping.
The tool surface covers the core Open Finance lifecycle well: list and get accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, plus sync, reconnect, and category updates. It also includes connector search and provider status. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool for updating or deleting a transaction category rule, and no direct CRUD for connections (only list and disconnect), but these are acceptable gaps.