Lists loan contracts per bank connection (GET /loans). Pass items as an array of connection selectors (item_id uuid, connector_id, or connector_name) — one entry per connection to fetch; multiple connections are queried sequentially with rate-limit spacing. OMIT items to list loans across ALL linked banks. Returns { results, errors } per connection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | No |
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 show readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds sequential querying with rate-limit spacing and return format {results, errors}. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value. No fluff.
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?
Complex tool with array parameter and sequential behavior, but description covers purpose, parameter usage, and return format. Minor gap: no mention of error handling per connection beyond returning errors field.
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?
Schema has 0% description coverage, but description fully explains the `items` parameter: array of connection selectors (item_id uuid, connector_id, or connector_name) and that omitting lists all banks. Excellent compensation.
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?
Description clearly states the tool lists loan contracts per bank connection and specifies the endpoint (GET /loans). It distinguishes from siblings like openfinance_get_loan_detail by mentioning per-connection listing.
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?
Describes when to use `items` (for specific connections) and when to omit (all banks). Mentions sequential querying with rate-limit spacing. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but context is clear.
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.