SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

NerdWallet best credit card rankings for a category: rank

finance_nerdwallet

Read-only

NerdWallet best credit card rankings for a category (cash-back, travel, balance-transfer, 0-apr, rewards, student, secured, business...): rank, card name, the 'best for' label, annual fee, NerdWallet star rating, image and link. From nerdwallet.com's public 'best credit cards' pages via a residential proxy; rankings are NerdWallet's editorial picks. Related tools on this server, for a different need: finance_bstock when you need B-Stock wholesale liquidation auctions: total live lots; finance_coingecko when you need CoinGecko spot prices for up to 10 coins in one currency. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "finance_nerdwallet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`category`	Yes	Ranking slug as in nerdwallet.com/best/credit-cards/<slug>, e.g. cash-back, travel, balance-transfer, 0-apr, rewards, student, secured, business

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavior: the source site, that retrieval goes through a residential proxy, that the picks are NerdWallet editorial, and the pricing model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402, failed calls free). The only gap is that it doesn't mention rate limits or throttling for the proxy path.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded and the opening clause is efficient, but the sentence is overlong: the return-field inventory duplicates the output schema, and the two unrelated sibling recommendations (B-Stock liquidation lots, CoinGecko spot prices) add words without helping tool selection here. Pricing and proxy details do earn their place.

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?

For a single-parameter lookup with a 100% covered schema and an output schema, the description supplies everything needed to call it correctly, plus cost and provenance context. The only missing element is explicit guidance on what happens with an unrecognized or misspelled category slug.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema's category description already documents the slug format with the same example list, so the description adds no syntax or format detail beyond it. The category enumeration in the prose is redundant with the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names a specific resource and scope: NerdWallet's editorial credit-card rankings for a category, and enumerates the categories (cash-back, travel, balance-transfer, 0-apr, rewards, student, secured, business). It also lists what comes back (rank, card name, 'best for' label, annual fee, star rating, image, link), so an agent can distinguish it from any price/market-data sibling without opening a schema.

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?

It gives context ('public best credit cards pages', 'editorial picks'), which implies when the data is appropriate, but offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance. The two sibling pointers (finance_bstock, finance_coingecko) are framed as 'a different need' rather than as alternatives to this tool, so they do little to route an agent between ranking-related choices.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance 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?