Meelion MCP
Server Details
Brazilian fixed income & financial data for AI. Selic, CDI, IPCA, CDB/LCI/LCA rankings, FX rates.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- Meelion-com/meelion-mcp
- GitHub Stars
- 1
- Server Listing
- mcp-meelion
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.3/5 across 4 of 4 tools scored.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: get_best_investments finds opportunities, get_financial_indicators provides macroeconomic data, get_investment_details gives deep info on a specific investment, and get_quotes fetches currency/metal/crypto quotes. No overlap.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: get_best_investments, get_financial_indicators, get_investment_details, get_quotes. Predictable and clear.
With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for a financial data provider covering fixed income, economic indicators, and market quotes. Each tool earns its place without being too few or too many.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle for the domain: discovery (get_best_investments), details (get_investment_details), context (get_financial_indicators), and related assets (get_quotes). No obvious gaps for a read-only information service.
Available Tools
4 toolsget_best_investmentsMelhores investimentos de renda fixaARead-onlyInspect
Busca as melhores oportunidades de renda fixa disponíveis na Meelion, com filtros por tipo de investimento, distribuidor, instituição, prazo e limite de resultados. Modo aberto (meelion_pro=0): no máximo 5 itens, seeMoreOnSite aponta para o comparador em www.meelion.com. Modo Pro (meelion_pro=1): padrão 10 com acesso completo e 5 com acesso limitado; o parâmetro limit respeita teto 200 (completo) ou 10 (limitado). detailUrl e links de site usam a base pública (MCP.public_base_url). Use quando o usuário quiser encontrar onde o dinheiro pode render mais, comparar CDB, LCI, LCA, CRI, CRA, debêntures ou outros produtos de renda fixa, ver rankings de melhores investimentos de hoje, melhores investimentos por prazo, por tipo ou por corretora/banco. Os dados são indicativos e podem mudar; o usuário deve confirmar as condições na instituição financeira antes de investir. English keywords: Brazilian fixed income, best investments today, CDB, LCI, LCA, CRI, CRA, debentures, highest yield, investment ranking, maturity, distributor, issuer, net return, gross yield.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Número máximo de resultados a retornar. Use valores menores para respostas rápidas e valores maiores para comparações mais amplas. | |
| prazo | No | Slug ou ID da faixa de prazo. Exemplos: prazo-ate-1-ano, prazo-1-a-2-anos, prazo-2-a-3-anos. | |
| distributors | No | IDs, nomes ou slugs dos distribuidores, corretoras ou instituições. Exemplos: XP Investimentos, Itaú, BTG Pactual, Banco Inter. | |
| investment_types | No | IDs, nomes ou slugs dos tipos de investimento. Exemplos: CDB, LCI, LCA, CRI, CRA, debêntures. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses mode-dependent behavior (open vs Pro) and limits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. Adds context about data being indicative and requiring confirmation, but no contradiction with annotations.
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?
Description is comprehensive but slightly lengthy; however, each sentence adds value. Purpose is front-loaded, and structure is logical.
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?
Covers key aspects: filters, mode-dependent limits, return elements (detailUrl, seeMoreOnSite), and data disclaimer. No output schema, but the tool's behavior is well-explained.
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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds some context about the limit parameter's behavior in different modes, but doesn't significantly enhance meaning beyond schema descriptions.
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?
Description clearly specifies the tool searches for best fixed income opportunities with filters, distinct from sibling tools like get_financial_indicators or get_quotes.
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?
Explicitly states 'Use quando o usuário quiser...' and lists many usage scenarios like comparing CDB, LCI, LCA, etc. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives among siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_financial_indicatorsIndicadores financeiros do BrasilARead-onlyInspect
Retorna indicadores financeiros atualizados do Brasil acompanhados pela Meelion, incluindo Selic, CDI/DI, IPCA, poupança e projeções relevantes quando disponíveis. Use quando o usuário perguntar sobre taxas atuais, indicadores econômicos, inflação, juros, rentabilidade de referência ou contexto macroeconômico para investimentos de renda fixa. English keywords: Brazilian financial indicators, Selic, CDI, DI, IPCA, inflation, interest rates, savings account, fixed income benchmarks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states the tool returns 'indicadores financeiros atualizados' and includes 'projeções relevantes quando disponíveis', adding behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not mention rate limits or authentication needs, but the annotation already covers the read-only nature.
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 concise with three sentences: purpose, usage guidance, and English keywords. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.
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?
Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (a list of indicators) and when to use it. It could be slightly more complete by describing the output format or providing an example, but it is mostly sufficient.
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?
The tool has no parameters (0 params), and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). Per guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since there are none.
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 explicitly states the tool returns Brazilian financial indicators (Selic, CDI, IPCA, poupança, projections), with a clear verb 'Retorna' and specific resources. It distinguishes from siblings like get_best_investments and get_quotes by focusing on macroeconomic context for fixed income.
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 description provides explicit usage scenarios: 'Use quando o usuário perguntar sobre taxas atuais, indicadores econômicos, inflação, juros, rentabilidade de referência ou contexto macroeconômico para investimentos de renda fixa' and includes English keywords. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_investment_detailsDetalhes de um investimentoARead-onlyInspect
Retorna detalhes completos de um investimento específico da Meelion a partir do ID ou slug, incluindo informações como tipo, emissor, distribuidor, rentabilidade, prazo, vencimento, garantias, riscos e demais campos disponíveis. Use quando o usuário quiser entender melhor uma oportunidade específica, comparar detalhes antes de investir ou aprofundar um item retornado por get_best_investments. English keywords: investment details, fixed income product, CDB, LCI, LCA, CRI, CRA, debenture, issuer, distributor, maturity, yield, guarantees, risk.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | ID interno do investimento, se disponível. | |
| slug | No | Slug público do investimento na Meelion. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and description aligns by indicating a read operation. Adds behavioral context: returns comprehensive details, lists fields, and specifies input methods (ID or slug). No contradictions.
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?
Description is front-loaded with purpose, includes relevant details, and ends with English keywords. Efficient but could be slightly more concise without losing clarity.
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?
No output schema, but description compensates by listing information types returned (type, issuer, distributor, yield, maturity, guarantees, risk). Covers input options comprehensively.
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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description reiterates the id/slug input but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema.
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?
Description clearly states it returns full details of a specific investment by ID or slug, listing included information types. It distinguishes from sibling tool get_best_investments by indicating it's for deepening details of a specific item.
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?
Explicitly outlines when to use: to understand a specific opportunity, compare details before investing, or deepen an item from get_best_investments. Provides English keywords for cross-lingual context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_quotesCotacoes de moedas e ativosARead-onlyInspect
Retorna cotações atualizadas de ativos e moedas acompanhados pela Meelion, como dólar, euro, ouro, prata e Bitcoin. Use quando o usuário perguntar sobre câmbio, cotação atual, variação de moedas, metais ou criptoativos usados como referência de mercado. English keywords: USD/BRL, EUR/BRL, dollar, euro, gold, silver, Bitcoin, BTC, market quotes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| assets | No | Lista opcional de ativos desejados. Valores aceitos: usd, eur, gold, silver, btc. Se omitido, retorna todas as cotações disponíveis. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that it returns 'cotações atualizadas' (updated quotes) and lists specific assets. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or error handling, but with annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.
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 two sentences plus a line of English keywords, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every part earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.
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?
For a read-only query tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it covers when to use, the parameter semantics, and the expected result (updated quotes). It could mention the response format or real-time behavior, but overall it provides sufficient context.
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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds value by explaining the assets parameter: listing accepted values and clarifying that omitting it returns all quotes. This provides meaningful extra guidance beyond the schema.
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 verb 'Retorna cotações atualizadas' (returns updated quotes) and specifies the resource: assets and currencies tracked by Meelion. It lists concrete examples (dólar, euro, ouro, prata, Bitcoin) and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on market quotes, not investments or indicators.
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 description explicitly states when to use: 'Use quando o usuário perguntar sobre câmbio, cotação atual...' and provides English keywords for clarity. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternative tools, but the usage context is clear and sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.