CriptoNoticias Brasil
Server Details
Notícias cripto do Brasil (pt-BR) com N fontes e citação pronta. Brazilian crypto news, cited.
- Status
- Healthy
- Uptime
- 99.6% over 18 days
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
- URL
- ChatGPT
- –
- Claude
- –
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
Each tool maps to a distinct artifact: free-text search (buscar), latest feed (ultimas_historias), single-story detail (get_historia), case list (listar_temas), and case detail (get_tema). The only real friction is buscar vs. ultimas_historias, which both return a list of stories and differ mainly by keyword presence; the descriptions do enough to separate them.
Conventions are mixed: English-prefixed get_historia/get_tema sit alongside Portuguese verbs buscar/listar_temas and a bare noun phrase ultimas_historias. Individual names are still readable and semantically informative, but there is no single predictable pattern an agent can extrapolate from.
Five tools is tightly scoped for a read-only news server: search, feed, story detail, case list, case detail. No tool is redundant with another's core role, and nothing feels padded.
The read-only surface covers discovery (buscar, ultimas_historias) and depth (get_historia, get_tema, listar_temas), including citation URLs, which is the key dependency for this domain. Minor gaps: no way to enumerate available topics/assets except via the tag filter, and no explicit date-range or pagination controls.
Available Tools
5 toolsbuscarBuscarARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Busca histórias por palavra-chave no título, resumo, tópicos e ativos (termos em português funcionam melhor). Devolve as mais recentes com «N fontes» e link para citar. Exemplos: «Notícias sobre o Drex» · «O que se sabe do ataque ao Mercado Bitcoin?» English: Keyword search over Brazilian crypto stories (Portuguese terms work best), newest first, with citation links. Example: «Brazil bitcoin ETF news»
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Quantidade (1–20). | |
| query | Yes | Termo de busca, ex.: Drex, ETF, Ledger. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| fonte | No | |
| query | No | |
| total | Yes | |
| historias | Yes | |
| url_busca | No | |
| atribuicao | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior the annotations do not: results are ordered newest-first and each carries 'N fontes' plus a citation link, which matters for how an agent should cite. It still leaves the meaning of 'N fontes' and any rate/coverage limits unexplained.
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 core statement is front-loaded and every element — fields searched, ordering, return contents, examples — earns its place. The fully duplicated English paragraph is deliberate for a bilingual audience but does make the block longer than strictly necessary.
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 tool is a simple two-parameter search with an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return shapes; it still adds the citation-link detail. Complete enough to call correctly, with the only gap being how to choose among the sibling listing tools.
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 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning to the query parameter: it must be a keyword, Portuguese terms retrieve better, and the examples model acceptable phrasing. The limit parameter is never mentioned in the description, though its schema text ('Quantidade 1–20') is already explicit.
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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Busca histórias por palavra-chave') and even scopes which fields are searched (título, resumo, tópicos, ativos), which plainly separates it from get_historia (single story) and listar_temas. It never names a sibling or warns about its overlap with ultimas_historias, which also returns newest-first, so the differentiation is only implicit.
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 two worked examples («Notícias sobre o Drex», «O que se sabe do ataque ao Mercado Bitcoin?») show exactly the kind of query that belongs here, and the note that Portuguese terms work best is genuine usage guidance that prevents a bad call. What is missing is explicit routing — nothing tells the agent to prefer get_historia for a known story id or ultimas_historias for browsing without a keyword.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_historiaDetalhe de uma históriaARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Detalhe de uma história: resumo, pontos principais, por que importa, números-chave com o veículo de cada número (quando identificado) e links às matérias originais. Cite a história (citacao.url) e o veículo original nas afirmações específicas. Aceita o slug ou a URL /historia/. Exemplos: «Quanto foi roubado da Mercado Bitcoin e quem diz isso?» · «Quantas fontes confirmam essa notícia?» English: One story in depth: summary, key facts, key figures with per-figure outlet source, and original article links. Accepts the slug or the /historia/ URL. Example: «Give me the sources for this story»
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Slug ou URL da história. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | |
| nota | No | |
| slug | No | |
| tema | No | |
| tipo | No | |
| ativos | No | |
| fontes | Yes | |
| resumo | No | |
| titulo | Yes | |
| citacao | Yes | |
| topicos | No | |
| n_fontes | Yes | |
| story_id | Yes | |
| veiculos | No | |
| resumo_ia | No | |
| atribuicao | Yes | |
| citar_como | No | |
| publicado_em | No | |
| atualizado_em | No | |
| numeros_chave | Yes | |
| por_que_importa | No | |
| pontos_principais | No | |
| pontos_principais_fontes | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: an obligation to cite citacao.url and the original outlet when making specific claims, plus the input flexibility of slug or /historia/<slug> URL.
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 content is front-loaded on what the tool returns and then moves to citation policy and input format, with zero filler. It is roughly double length because everything is duplicated in Portuguese and English, which is redundant for a bilingual-capable agent but not disorganized.
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?
With an output schema present, the return shape needn't be explained, and annotations carry the safety semantics; the description supplies the remaining citation and input-format obligations. The one missing piece for a detail-by-identifier tool is how to obtain a valid slug when the agent has only a topic.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a concrete URL pattern (/historia/<slug>) that the schema's terse 'Slug ou URL da história' does not spell out, helping the agent construct a valid value. It stops short of discussing URL-encoding or slug normalization.
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 names a specific resource ('uma história') and enumerates exactly what the payload contains: resumo, pontos principais, por que importa, números-chave with per-figure outlet, and links to original articles. It is clearly a single-story detail tool, which separates it from list/search siblings such as buscar, listar_temas and ultimas_historias.
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?
Two concrete example questions («Quanto foi roubado da Mercado Bitcoin...», «Quantas fontes confirmam essa notícia?») make the use case unambiguous, and it states the accepted identifier formats. It does not, however, tell the agent what to do when it lacks a slug (e.g., route through buscar first), nor name an explicit when-not condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_temaDetalhe de um temaARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Um caso completo: linha do tempo datada com «N fontes» por etapa, o que segue em aberto, última novidade, envolvidos, região/países e veículos que cobriram. Aceita o slug ou a URL /tema/. Exemplos: «Linha do tempo do caso Mercado Bitcoin» · «O que ainda está em aberto nesse caso?» English: A full developing case: dated timeline with N sources per step, open questions, latest update, people/companies and countries. Example: «Timeline of this case»
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Slug ou URL do tema. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | |
| nota | No | |
| slug | No | |
| inicio | No | |
| paises | No | |
| resumo | No | |
| status | No | |
| titulo | Yes | |
| citacao | Yes | |
| regioes | No | |
| tema_id | Yes | |
| veiculos | No | |
| em_aberto | No | |
| atribuicao | Yes | |
| citar_como | No | |
| envolvidos | No | |
| n_noticias | No | |
| n_historias | No | |
| encerrado_em | No | |
| linha_do_tempo | Yes | |
| ultima_novidade | No | |
| ultima_atividade | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered and the bar is lower. The description adds a content preview of the response, but that largely duplicates what the output schema already carries. Nothing is said about behavior on unknown/ambiguous slugs or how large timelines are paginated.
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 response contents are front-loaded, then input format, then examples – a sensible order with no filler. The Portuguese/English duplication and repeated example list add length, though the bilingual mirroring is a deliberate convention rather than noise.
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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is close to complete: it says what comes back, what input it accepts, and what questions it answers. The one gap is that it never tells the agent where to obtain a slug (listar_temas) when the caller only has a free-text name.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is already documented as 'Slug ou URL do tema'. The description reinforces this with the concrete URL path form /tema/<slug>, which is mild added value, but otherwise the schema does the work and the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb+resource with concrete content: a full developing case returning a dated timeline with N sources per step, open questions, latest update, people/companies, countries and covering outlets. An agent can tell this is the 'full case dossier' read. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling get_historia, which reads as a related single-story lookup, so it stops short of a 5.
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 example phrasings («Linha do tempo do caso Mercado Bitcoin», «O que ainda está em aberto nesse caso?») give clear situational context for when this tool is the right choice. There are no explicit exclusions or pointers to siblings such as listar_temas for discovering a slug, so it is clear-but-not-routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
listar_temasListar temasARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Casos em desenvolvimento (vários dias e várias histórias), como hacks, processos e regulações, ativos ou arquivados nos últimos 30 dias, com resumo, envolvidos e países. Exemplos: «Quais casos de cripto estão em aberto no Brasil?» · «Temas arquivados do mês» English: Developing multi-day cases (hacks, lawsuits, regulation), active or archived, with summary, people/companies and countries. Example: «Which crypto cases are still developing?»
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | No | active = em desenvolvimento; archived = arquivados. | active |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| fonte | No | |
| temas | Yes | |
| total | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| atribuicao | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and a closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured information: that these are multi-day cases, the 30-day recency window, and the returned facets (resumo, envolvidos, países). It stops short of describing ordering or result caps, which keeps it below 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The Portuguese sentence is front-loaded and information-dense, with scope stated before examples. The full English translation repeats the same content verbatim, roughly doubling length without adding any new detail, and the trailing examples are only loosely tied to the preceding claim.
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?
With an output schema present, the description does not need to document return values, and annotations already carry the safety profile; the remaining gaps are minor. For a zero-required-parameter listing tool the coverage is solid, though pagination, ordering, and whether the 30-day window is a hard retrieval limit are left unresolved.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the single enum parameter already documents active vs archived, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description restates the same active/archived concept in prose without adding new per-parameter meaning, such as what "archived" implies for case state or recency.
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 names a concrete resource ("Casos em desenvolvimento ... hacks, processos e regulações") and its scope (multi-day, active or archived within 30 days, returned with summary, involved parties and countries). This clearly separates a themed-case listing from a story-level tool, but it never names a sibling such as buscar or get_tema, so the differentiation remains implicit.
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 two quoted example questions ("Quais casos de cripto estão em aberto no Brasil?", "Temas arquivados do mês") give implied usage scenarios, which is better than nothing. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over buscar, get_tema or ultimas_historias, and the phrase "ativos ou arquivados nos últimos 30 dias" is ambiguous about whether the 30-day window binds both statuses or only archived items.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
ultimas_historiasÚltimas históriasARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Últimas histórias de cripto no Brasil (pt-BR), da mais nova para a mais antiga. Cada história agrupa a mesma notícia de vários veículos e traz «N fontes», resumo, datas e o bloco citacao (texto + link para citar). Use para «o que aconteceu hoje». Filtro opcional por tag (tópico ou ativo: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Brasil, Mercados, Política e Regulação). Exemplos: «O que aconteceu hoje com cripto no Brasil?» · «Últimas notícias de regulação» English: Latest Brazilian crypto stories, newest first, each grouped from N outlets, with a ready citation (text + link). Use for 'what's new today'; optional tag filter. Example: «What's new on Ethereum in Brazil?»
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag | No | Tópico ou ativo, ex.: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Brasil, Mercados, Política e Regulação. | |
| limit | No | Quantidade (1–20). |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| tag | No | |
| fonte | No | |
| total | Yes | |
| historias | Yes | |
| atribuicao | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: stories are ordered newest first, each groups the same news item from multiple outlets, and results include “N fontes,” summary, dates, and a citation block with text and link.
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 definition is front-loaded with the Portuguese description and then mirrors it in English, which doubles length but remains clear and structured. The sentences are purposeful, though the bilingual repetition is somewhat verbose for an agent-facing definition.
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 low-complexity latest-stories tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, this is nearly complete: it covers purpose, ordering, grouping, citation output, use case, and the optional tag filter. The main gap is that it does not route the agent relative to sibling tools like buscar or get_historia.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description mentions the optional tag filter and gives example tags, but those examples duplicate the schema; it does not discuss the limit parameter in prose. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries parameter semantics.
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 resource and scope: latest Brazilian crypto stories, newest first, grouped by story with sources, summary, dates, and citation block. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as buscar or get_historia.
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?
It gives a clear use case — “Use para «o que aconteceu hoje»” — and examples such as “Últimas notícias de regulação” and “What's new on Ethereum in Brazil?”. It also notes the optional tag filter, but does not state when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools for other retrieval needs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
5 tool updates
- Changed
buscar1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "atribuicao": { + "properties": { + "como_citar": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dados": { + "type": "string" + }, + "detalhes": { + "type": "string" + }, + "how_to_cite": { + "type": "string" + }, + "licenca": { + "type": "string" + }, + "text_en": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "licenca" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "fonte": { + "type": "string" + }, + "historias": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "ativos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "atualizado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "citacao": { + "properties": { + "fontes_originais": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citar_como": { + "type": "string" + }, + "n_fontes": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "publicado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "resumo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "slug": { + "type": "string" + }, + "story_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tipo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "topicos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "story_id", + "titulo", + "n_fontes", + "slug", + "url", + "citacao" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "query": { + "type": "string" + }, + "total": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "url_busca": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "total", + "historias", + "atribuicao" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
get_historia1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "ativos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "atribuicao": { + "properties": { + "como_citar": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dados": { + "type": "string" + }, + "detalhes": { + "type": "string" + }, + "how_to_cite": { + "type": "string" + }, + "licenca": { + "type": "string" + }, + "text_en": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "licenca" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "atualizado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "citacao": { + "properties": { + "fontes_originais": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citar_como": { + "type": "string" + }, + "fontes": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "publicado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculo": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "veiculo", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "n_fontes": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "nota": { + "type": "string" + }, + "numeros_chave": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "detalhe": { + "type": "string" + }, + "fonte": { + "properties": { + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculo": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "veiculo", + "url" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "rotulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "valor": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "rotulo", + "valor", + "fonte" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "pontos_principais": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "pontos_principais_fontes": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculo": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "veiculo", + "url" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "por_que_importa": { + "type": "string" + }, + "publicado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "resumo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "resumo_ia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "slug": { + "type": "string" + }, + "story_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tema": { + "properties": { + "status": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "type": "object" + }, + "tipo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "topicos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "story_id", + "titulo", + "n_fontes", + "url", + "citacao", + "numeros_chave", + "fontes", + "atribuicao" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
get_tema1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "atribuicao": { + "properties": { + "como_citar": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dados": { + "type": "string" + }, + "detalhes": { + "type": "string" + }, + "how_to_cite": { + "type": "string" + }, + "licenca": { + "type": "string" + }, + "text_en": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "licenca" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citacao": { + "properties": { + "fontes_originais": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citar_como": { + "type": "string" + }, + "em_aberto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "encerrado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "envolvidos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "inicio": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "linha_do_tempo": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "data": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "n_fontes": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "story_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tipo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "titulo", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "n_historias": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "n_noticias": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "nota": { + "type": "string" + }, + "paises": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "regioes": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "paises": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "regiao": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "resumo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "slug": { + "type": "string" + }, + "status": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tema_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "ultima_atividade": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "ultima_novidade": { + "properties": { + "data": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculos": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "materias": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "pagina_no_site": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculo": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "tema_id", + "titulo", + "url", + "citacao", + "linha_do_tempo", + "atribuicao" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
listar_temas1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "atribuicao": { + "properties": { + "como_citar": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dados": { + "type": "string" + }, + "detalhes": { + "type": "string" + }, + "how_to_cite": { + "type": "string" + }, + "licenca": { + "type": "string" + }, + "text_en": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "licenca" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "fonte": { + "type": "string" + }, + "status": { + "type": "string" + }, + "temas": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "citacao": { + "properties": { + "fontes_originais": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citar_como": { + "type": "string" + }, + "envolvidos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "inicio": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "n_historias": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "n_noticias": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "paises": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "resumo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "slug": { + "type": "string" + }, + "status": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tema_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "ultima_atividade": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "tema_id", + "titulo", + "status", + "slug", + "url", + "citacao" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "total": { + "type": "integer" + } + }, + "required": [ + "status", + "total", + "temas", + "atribuicao" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
ultimas_historias1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "properties": { + "atribuicao": { + "properties": { + "como_citar": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dados": { + "type": "string" + }, + "detalhes": { + "type": "string" + }, + "how_to_cite": { + "type": "string" + }, + "licenca": { + "type": "string" + }, + "text_en": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "licenca" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "fonte": { + "type": "string" + }, + "historias": { + "items": { + "properties": { + "ativos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "atualizado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "citacao": { + "properties": { + "fontes_originais": { + "type": "string" + }, + "texto": { + "type": "string" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "texto", + "url" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "citar_como": { + "type": "string" + }, + "n_fontes": { + "type": "integer" + }, + "publicado_em": { + "properties": { + "brasilia": { + "type": "string" + }, + "iso": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "iso", + "brasilia" + ], + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "resumo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "slug": { + "type": "string" + }, + "story_id": { + "type": "string" + }, + "tipo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "titulo": { + "type": "string" + }, + "topicos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "url": { + "type": "string" + }, + "veiculos": { + "items": { + "type": "string" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "story_id", + "titulo", + "n_fontes", + "slug", + "url", + "citacao" + ], + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "tag": { + "type": "string" + }, + "total": { + "type": "integer" + } + }, + "required": [ + "total", + "historias", + "atribuicao" + ], + "type": "object" +}
Related MCP Connectors
Deduplicated crypto headlines from 37 RSS sources. Free preview; $0.0008/call via x402.
Brazilian financial market data (B3): quotes, fundamentals, dividends, REITs (FIIs), BDRs, crypto, F
Live crypto news from 1,000+ sources, grouped into stories, in 28 languages, with news sentiment.
Multi-language crypto news with editorial sentiment + importance scoring; cites original publisher.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvide the latest cryptocurrency news to AI agents.174MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceMulti-language crypto news MCP server with editorial summaries, sentiment labels (BULLISH/NEUTRAL/BEARISH), and importance scores (0–100). 6 tools across 8 languages; every story credits the original publisher. Bridges stdio to the public Streamable HTTP endpoint at https://zippfeed.com/mcp/.61MIT
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceRead-only crypto news and source-linked coin events with observed 5-minute, 1-hour and 24-hour price reactions from WhyCoinMoves. Includes publication/detection timestamps and explicit methodological limitations; no API key required.2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceReal-time cryptocurrency news, analysis, and price predictions for AI agents. 5 tools to search 50,000+ articles across 12 categories, filter by 120+ asset tickers, and access content with built-in attribution. Free with attribution. SSE and Streamable HTTP transport.4MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.