MoneyTools x402 agent toolkit

Business-day calculator

business_days

Read-onlyIdempotent

Count business days between dates or add N business days, using the official Taiwan calendar, US federal holidays or plain weekdays. Free: 10 calls/day; then $0.001/call via x402 (MCP params._meta["x402/payment"] or HTTP) or X-API-Key credits. [served by tools.moneytools.dev]

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "start": "<start>"
    },
    "name": "business_days"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`add`	No	or add N business days
`end`	No	YYYY-MM-DD to count to
`start`	Yes	YYYY-MM-DD
`country`	No	TW \| US \| none

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the holiday data sources, the free tier (10 calls/day), the per-call price, and the two payment paths (x402 via _meta or HTTP, X-API-Key credits) plus the serving host. It does not explain what happens when both 'end' and 'add' are supplied, but the paid-tier disclosure is substantive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the function before the commercial terms, and no filler. The pricing/payment sentence is dense but every clause is operationally relevant to an agent deciding whether it can call.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the commercial and data-source context an agent needs; the only gap is not stating the interaction between 'end' and 'add' or whether the start date is inclusive.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description genuinely clarifies the 'country' values by mapping them to 'official Taiwan calendar, US federal holidays or plain weekdays' — including what 'none' means, which the schema's bare 'TW | US | none' does not. It also restates that 'add' takes N business days, reinforcing the mode switch.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Count business days between dates or add N business days') and immediately scopes it to three calendar modes. An agent knows exactly what computation this performs without opening the schema, and no sibling in the catalog overlaps with date arithmetic.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The two operating modes (count between dates vs. add N days) are named, which implies how to pick parameters, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative. The rest of the description is pricing, not usage routing.

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

All MoneyTools x402 agent toolkit tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?