Tesouro em Foco

price_history_lookup

Read-onlyIdempotent

Looks up historical published rates and prices for Tesouro Direto bonds on specific dates.

Accepts a bulk array of queries (up to 50). Each query: productId + referenceDate + exactly one paper identifier (maturityDate, maturityYear, or conversionYear for Renda+/Educa+). Returns official STN data for that date, or found=false.

Use when the user asks for the official published rate or unit price on a specific past date (e.g. "what was the IPCA+ 2035 rate in March 2024?").

Each result has optional investorBuy and investorSell objects with { rate, price }:

investorBuy — investor PURCHASE side (STN's Taxa de Compra / PU de Compra). This is the standard quoted rate.
investorSell — investor SELL-BACK side (STN's Taxa de Venda / PU de Venda). Normally investorSell.rate > investorBuy.rate.

Rates are decimal fraction strings (e.g. '0.0737' = 7.37% a.a.) — same convention as simulate_bond and live_quotes_lookup.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`queries`	Yes	List of point queries (1 to 50). Each query returns one result row or found=false.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: bulk limit of 50, found=false for missing data, optional investorBuy/investorSell objects with rate/price meaning, and the decimal fraction string convention. It also discloses edge cases like multiple papers and earliest maturityDate selection.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: main purpose, then query rules, use-case, return-field semantics, and rate convention. Each sentence contributes necessary detail for a complex bulk lookup tool, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description does not need to enumerate return fields, but it adds crucial context: found=false behavior, bulk limits, field semantics (buy vs sell side), and rate string format. It also cross-references sibling tools for convention consistency, making the description fully self-sufficient.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the query pattern (productId + referenceDate + exactly one identifier), clarifying which identifier type fits Renda+/Educa+ conversionYear, and noting the earliest-maturity rule. It also introduces rate-format semantics not present in the schema.

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 description opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Looks up historical published rates and prices for Tesouro Direto bonds on specific dates.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by scoping to specific past dates, bulk queries, and official STN data. The 'Use when' example reinforces the purpose.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use: 'Use when the user asks for the official published rate or unit price on a specific past date.' It also explains the query structure and return behavior. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Tesouro em Foco tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: catalog_list for discovery, live_quotes_lookup for real-time quotes, price_history_lookup for specific-date lookups, price_history_series for time series, price_history_ranking for cross-bond comparisons, and simulate_* for simulations. The overlap among the four quote/history tools is real but mitigated by detailed descriptions clarifying when each should be used.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use lowercase snake_case with descriptive words, but the pattern is slightly mixed: catalog_list, live_quotes_lookup, and price_history_* follow an object+verb structure, while simulate_bond and simulate_redemption follow a verb+object structure. Though not perfectly uniform, the naming remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for its domain—covering catalog discovery, live and historical quotes, rankings, indicators, and simulations. No tool feels redundant or extraneous, and the count is well within the ideal 3-15 range.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core lifecycle: discover bonds, fetch live/historical rates, simulate pricing, and simulate redemption with tax details. A minor gap is that indicator_history currently supports only 'selic-target' despite implying broader coverage, but this does not undermine the server's primary purpose.

Resources

Need Help?