Returns the current toolkit state: installed MCPs, their connection status, the accounts connected to each one, and how many catalog tools each exposes.
| 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 declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds specific behavioral context by listing what the returned state includes (installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, tool counts), which goes beyond the annotations and gives a clear picture of the tool's output semantics.
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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists the specific data returned. Every part is informative, with no filler or redundancy.
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?
Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (state details). With no parameters and no side effects, and given the thorough annotations, the description is complete for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the 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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema describes an empty object with 100% coverage. Per the instructions, the baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools, and the description does not need to add parameter details. It correctly focuses on the return contents.
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 states a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('toolkit state') and then enumerates the exact contents: installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, and catalog tool counts. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like connect or authenticate, which have different purposes.
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 implies usage (when you need to inspect toolkit state), and the sibling tools are clearly different (authentication, connection, bug reporting, etc.). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, so it falls short of a perfect 5.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: authenticate for login, connect for status, marketplace for catalog/invoke, report_bug for feedback, show_version for version info, toolkit_info for state, and the single domain tool for certificate retrieval. No overlapping functionality.
Most tool names follow a lowercase snake_case pattern (report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info), but single words without underscores (connect, marketplace) and the long compound Portuguese terminal (tribunal_tjsp_obter_cert_1grau_consultar) disrupt perfect uniformity. Still, the overall convention is readable and predictable.
7 tools is a well‑scoped set for a platform toolkit that covers authentication, connection, catalog, feedback, versioning, and state, plus one specific operational feature. Each tool earns its place.
The toolkit surface is complete for its platform management role (auth, connect, discover, invoke, install, subscribe, feedback, version state). The domain-specific certificate capability is limited to one action, but the platform tools fully cover the meta‑operations, so only a minor gap is present.