reference-data

settlement_date

PAID ($0.05). Settlement/value date: the date n business days after a trade date, computed on the INTERSECTION of the calendars you name, with a per-day trail showing every skipped day and why, on which calendar. Supply business_days for a cycle you are trading under, or market + instrument_class to have a settlement cycle applied that we cite to its primary source (e.g. US equities T+1 under 17 CFR 240.15c6-1(a); UK gilts T+1 by DMO convention, which is NOT the T+2 equity cycle; Japan equities T+2 but JGBs T+1). Calendars are NATIONAL statutory holiday calendars with researched statutory weekend rules (Israel Saturday-only, Gulf Friday+Saturday, India Sundays plus the 2nd and 4th Saturday), NOT CSD or exchange calendars — each response states the basis and any known divergence. Use 'eu.t2' for the euro cash leg. We refuse FREE rather than guess: beyond published calendar coverage, no cited cycle for the instrument (government bonds never inherit an equity cycle), a cycle not in force on the trade date, or FX spot value dates. Free companion: GET /settlement-conventions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`market`	No	ISO country of the market whose cited cycle should apply (with instrument_class)
`api_key`	No	API key (bypasses x402; metered for invoicing)
`calendars`	Yes	Calendar ids to intersect: two-letter ISO country codes, plus 'eu.t2' for the euro cash leg
`trade_date`	Yes	Trade/reference date, YYYY-MM-DD. Day 0: never counted, never rolled.
`business_days`	No	The offset you are trading under (T+n)
`instrument_class`	No	Instrument class — a government bond never inherits an equity cycle

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, description bears full burden. It discloses paid nature ($0.05), per-day trail output, use of statutory calendars (not CSD/exchange), refusal scenarios, and companion API. Highly transparent.

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?

Description is long but efficient; each sentence adds unique value. Front-loaded with key details (paid, core function). Slightly verbose but appropriate for complexity. No waste.

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?

Comprehensive coverage: return value (per-day trail), edge cases (refusal), prerequisites (calendars), and related endpoint. No output schema, but description adequately describes output. Complete for complex tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema has 100% coverage but description adds significant meaning: explains trade_date day 0, calendar id format ('eu.t2'), business_days vs market+instrument_class usage, and instrument_class enum specifics. Adds value beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool computes settlement/value dates based on business days and calendar intersections. It distinguishes itself from siblings like count_working_days and get_public_holidays by focusing on settlement date calculation with detailed calendar logic.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (e.g., trading under a cycle) and when not (e.g., no cited cycle, FX spot dates). Mentions alternative endpoint GET /settlement-conventions and conditions where the tool refuses to guess.

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

All reference-data 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation: compliance check, tax computation, VAT breakdown, day counting, holiday retrieval, series value/history/snapshot, catalog listing, and settlement date calculation. Even where underlying data overlaps (e.g., minimum wage as a series), the outputs and use cases are clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

Nine of ten tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (check_minimum_wage, compute_income_tax, compute_vat, count_working_days, get_public_holidays, get_series, get_series_history, get_snapshot, list_series). The outlier is settlement_date, which uses a noun phrase rather than a verb-based name, though it remains unambiguous and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the server is well-scoped for its reference-data purpose, covering tax, wages, holidays, working days, series discovery, and settlement dates. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface provides comprehensive coverage: discovery via list_series, current/historical data via get_series and get_series_history, a full snapshot, tax computations, wage compliance, public holidays, working day counts, and settlement date calculations. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for the intended domain.

Resources

Need Help?