PAID ($0.005). Historical values of a reference series with effective date ranges, optionally filtered by from/to (YYYY-MM-DD). Pass api_key if you have one; otherwise the response explains how to pay via x402.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | Latest effective date, YYYY-MM-DD | |
| from | No | Earliest effective date, YYYY-MM-DD | |
| series | Yes | Series id | |
| api_key | No | API key | |
| country | Yes | ISO country code |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It openly states the payment requirement, the cost, and the x402 payment mechanism. It also notes that omitting api_key will result in the response explaining how to pay, which is useful. It does not describe the return format, but this is a minor gap.
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 highly concise: two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence covers purpose and filters, the second covers payment and authentication. Cost is front-loaded, making it immediately actionable.
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?
Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what data is returned (historical values), how to filter (from/to), and the payment/auth requirement. It does not explicitly list required parameters, but the schema handles that. Minor gap is the lack of return shape details, but the tool appears straightforward.
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 the baseline is 3. The description adds some value by explaining that api_key is optional and its purpose in the payment flow, but it does not provide additional semantics for country, series, from, or to beyond what the schema already states.
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 provides historical values of a reference series with effective date ranges. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_series or get_snapshot by emphasizing 'history' and 'effective date ranges', though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve'.
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 usage is implied: use when you need historical series data. It provides context about optional from/to filters and api_key handling, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or specify when not to use this tool relative to sibling tools.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: minimum wage, income tax, VAT, working days, holidays, series data, and settlement dates. No overlap in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_minimum_wage, compute_income_tax, get_public_holidays, list_series). Only 'settlement_date' is a noun phrase but still clear.
10 tools cover a well-scoped domain of economic reference data without bloat. The count feels appropriate for the server's purpose.
Covers core areas: wage, tax, VAT, holidays, series, settlement dates. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no social security or currency data), but the scope is clearly defined and noted.
