Consignatarias · Argentine Cattle Market

Índice Novillo (INMAG) hoy

cattle_price_index

Read-onlyIdempotent

INMAG diario del Mercado Agroganadero (MAG/Cañuelas): novillo de referencia HOY en ARS/kg vivo, ponderado por volumen. Devuelve valor, volumen, variación vs rueda previa (marca ruedas flacas) y promedio 5 ruedas. Sin args. Histórico: inmag_history. NO da precios por categoría (livestock_prices, semanal) ni subcategoría (livestock_prices_detailed); no comparar 1:1. [EN] Today's Argentine cattle price index (INMAG): live-weight steer reference price in ARS/kg, volume-weighted, plus the daily change.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes
`prev`	No
`unit`	Yes
`inmag`	Yes
`fuente`	Yes	Cita: página de consignatarias.com.ar que respalda el dato (utm_source=mcp) y fecha de consulta ISO (hora argentina).
`metric`	Yes
`volume`	No
`prev_date`	No
`avg_5_ruedas`	No
`change_dia_pct`	Yes
`prev_low_volume`	No
`change_vs_avg5_pct`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "avg_5_ruedas": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "change_dia_pct": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "change_vs_avg5_pct": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "date": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "fuente": {
+      "description": "Cita: página de consignatarias.com.ar que respalda el dato (utm_source=mcp) y fecha de consulta ISO (hora argentina).",
+      "properties": {
+        "consultado": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "url",
+        "consultado"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "inmag": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "metric": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "prev": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "prev_date": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "prev_low_volume": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "unit": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "volume": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "inmag",
+    "date",
+    "change_dia_pct",
+    "unit",
+    "metric",
+    "fuente"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral context: volume weighting, that thin trading sessions are flagged, the variation-vs-previous-session semantics, and the 5-session average. It stops short of describing error/empty conditions or refresh cadence, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core definition and constraints are front-loaded in the first clause, with siblings and exclusions following. The bracketed [EN] restatement is partially redundant duplication, which keeps it from a perfect score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema covers the return shape and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description's job is scope and routing, both of which it does fully. Weighting method, limitations, and the historical sibling are all disclosed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case, and the description explicitly confirms 'Sin args' so the agent won't hunt for optional filters. Nothing further can be said about parameter meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource (INMAG daily index for the Mercado Agroganadero), the exact reference (live-weight steer, ARS/kg, volume-weighted), and the timeframe (HOY). It also names the siblings it is not (livestock_prices, livestock_prices_detailed) and warns against 1:1 comparison, so an agent can place it precisely in the tool family.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit routing: use this for today's index, use inmag_history for historical series, and do not use it for category or subcategory prices. Both the alternative and the exclusions are stated outright rather than implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Consignatarias · Argentine Cattle Market tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.