MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.): log in in the browser, copy the access token. Best: add it to this server's config as a header Authorization: Bearer <token> for a permanent, non-expiring connection. Or paste it here for a session-only login: call with { token: "" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | 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 indicate idempotency and non-destructive behavior; the description adds useful context about session vs. permanent authentication, the token format, and the config header approach. It does not contradict 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?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the target audience and purpose. It includes concrete usage instructions without unnecessary fluff, though it packs several ideas into the second sentence.
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 login flow, token handling, and link retrieval are all covered, which is sufficient for a low-complexity auth tool. There is no output schema, and the return behavior is only implied ('get the link'), but the overall context is adequate.
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 schema only defines an optional string token with no description. The description explains that token is a JWT, when to pass it, and that omitting it returns the login link. This significantly compensates for the missing schema parameter description.
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 authenticates to MCP.AI for IDE agents via browser login and an access token. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing specifically on the authentication flow rather than general connectivity or marketplace functions.
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 explicitly provides two usage paths: permanent configuration via Authorization header, and session-only login by pasting a token. It also explains the calling convention for each case, including calling with no args to retrieve the login link.
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 distinct purposes, but connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, and marketplace's list_tools overlaps with toolkit_info's installed tools. The domain-specific tool is clearly separate.
Tool names are inconsistent: single verbs (authenticate, connect), a noun (marketplace), compound nouns (toolkit_info, show_version), and a long prefixed domain name (pref_mg_divinopolis_cnd_consultar). No consistent verb_noun pattern.
7 tools is a reasonable number, but 6 of them are generic platform tools unrelated to the server's stated domain of Divinópolis debt certificates. The tool set feels bloated for the specific purpose.
The domain is a single public-consultation endpoint; the query tool fully covers this need, with no missing CRUD operations. Generic tools provide adequate platform lifecycle support.