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 declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds sequential query behavior, rate-limit awareness, and response format ({results, errors}), which are not in 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?
Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant words. Each sentence adds essential information.
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?
Covers parameter usage, response structure, and default behavior. Missing details on pagination or specific rate limits, but sufficient for basic understanding.
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 0% schema description coverage, description fully compensates by explaining 'items' format (uuid, connector_id, or connector_name), behavior per connection, and effect of omission.
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 verb 'list', resource 'loan contracts', and context 'per bank connection'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like openfinance_get_loan_detail by focusing on listing across connections.
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?
Provides explicit instructions on using 'items' parameter for specific connections and omitting for all banks. Mentions sequential rate-limit spacing but lacks when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, especially within the openfinance_* family where each targets a different resource or action. A few minor overlaps exist—connect vs toolkit_info both report connection state, and marketplace internally includes report_bug while a top-level report_bug also exists—but these are unlikely to cause serious misselection.
The openfinance_* tools follow a consistent snake_case prefix with mostly verb_noun patterns like list_accounts, get_item_status, and force_sync. The general tools are also snake_case but mix verbs (connect, authenticate) with nouns (marketplace, toolkit_info), and openfinance_provider_status breaks the verb_noun pattern slightly.
25 tools is at the upper boundary of a heavy surface, but the Open Finance domain genuinely spans connections, accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, categories, and provider health. It feels dense rather than bloated, though a few general utilities like show_version and report_bug could arguably be consolidated.
The Open Finance surface is well covered: connection management, account/balance/transaction retrieval, credit card bills, loans, investments, category correction, force sync, and provider status are all present. Minor gaps exist—such as no direct investment position detail endpoint beyond the portfolio list, and payments/initiation are out of scope—but agents can accomplish the core read-only financial workflows without dead ends.