Skip to main content
Glama

Crypto, web, finance and app data tools

FX Carry Trade Ranking

fx_carry_ranking

FX carry trade ranking from central-bank policy rates: currency pairs ranked by interest-rate differential, optionally for one funding currency such as JPY or CHF.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fx_carry_ranking"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
fundingNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations were provided, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It successfully discloses the core calculation method—ranking based on the 'interest-rate differential'—which is a key piece of logic not evident from the name or the simple schema.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is highly efficient, using only two sentences. The first sentence defines the core function and source data, while the second sentence addresses the crucial optional filtering aspect.

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

Completeness3/5

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

While it explains the financial mechanics well, it is incomplete for a complex ranking tool. Given that an output schema exists, the description would benefit greatly from stating the format of the return value (e.g., 'returns a list of objects including currency pair, ranking, and differential percentage').

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate fully. It explains the function of the 'funding' parameter (e.g., JPY or CHF) and the nature of the ranking. However, it fails to provide semantic detail or constraints for the 'limit' parameter (e.g., minimum/maximum acceptable values for the rank limit).

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?

The purpose is stated clearly as providing a 'ranking' based on 'central-bank policy rates.' It specifically targets 'currency pairs' and 'interest-rate differential,' distinguishing it from general FX rate or general economic indicator tools in the sibling list.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides clear usage context by explaining the optionality of the funding currency. By mentioning 'optionally for one funding currency,' it guides the user on when this parameter becomes relevant for calculating the differential.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources