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, covering the safety profile. The description adds context about what the returned state includes, which clarifies the scope of the operation beyond 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without any fluff. Every word adds value.
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?
For a simple read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. No additional information is needed.
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 reflects that, making description-level parameter explanation unnecessary. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no irrelevant parameter discussion.
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 the current toolkit state and enumerates the specific components (installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, catalog tool counts). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from action-oriented siblings like authenticate or connect.
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 as a read-only state inspection tool, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tools are action-oriented, but no explicit recommendation is given.
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.
Several tools overlap in purpose: connect and toolkit_info both report connection status, authenticate and connect both deal with auth/connection, and marketplace alone covers search, describe, invoke, install, subscribe, and bug reporting, duplicating the standalone report_bug. The two webPosto tools are distinct but the broader set blurs boundaries.
The generic platform tools use inconsistent styles: single verbs (authenticate, connect), a noun (marketplace), and noun_underscore (toolkit_info). Only the webPosto tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_accounts, login_check), but the prefix and structure differ from the rest. No uniform convention is applied.
8 tools is within a reasonable range and not excessive. However, several are generic platform utilities that overlap, and the marketplace tool is a monolithic catch-all that arguably should be split into multiple focused tools. The count itself is acceptable, though the distribution is imbalanced.
As a server named webPosto, the toolset lacks any actual webPosto operations beyond listing accounts and validating login credentials. There are no tools for creating, reading, updating, or deleting posts, managing content, or performing other core webPosto functions. The marketplace tool can indirectly invoke other MCPs, but the stated domain is severely under-covered.