Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

nzxplorer-mcp

by io.github.mambaventures
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_esg_data

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) data for an NZX company. Includes emissions (scope 1/2/3, targets, verification), diversity (board/SLT/employee gender, Māori/Pasifika representation), safety (LTIFR/TRIFR, fatalities, FTE), and reporting standards (GRI/TCFD/SBTi).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoFilter by fiscal year
tickerYesNZX ticker symbol

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool payload. Null when the call did not produce one — read meta.availability_status to find out why, and do not treat null as zero, empty or "none found".
metaYes
toolYesTool that produced this result.
schema_versionYesEnvelope contract version. Bumps only on a breaking shape change.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The tool payload. Null when the call did not produce one — read meta.availability_status to find out why, and do not treat null as zero, empty or \"none found\"."
+    },
+    "meta": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "availability_status": {
+          "description": "ok: complete payload. truncated: payload exceeded the transport cap and was cut. parse_failed: payload is text this server could not parse as JSON. error: the tool raised.",
+          "enum": [
+            "ok",
+            "truncated",
+            "parse_failed",
+            "error"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "encoding": {
+          "description": "toon = pipe-delimited tabular encoding; header row names the columns.",
+          "enum": [
+            "json",
+            "toon"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "provenance": {
+          "description": "Whether the figures can cite a source document. \"undeclared\" means no claim has been made for this endpoint yet — it is not a claim that the data is unsourced.",
+          "enum": [
+            "direct",
+            "label",
+            "reachable",
+            "none",
+            "undeclared"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "retrieved_at": {
+          "description": "When this platform produced the answer — NOT the as-at date of the data.",
+          "format": "date-time",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "warnings": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "retrieved_at",
+        "availability_status",
+        "provenance"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "schema_version": {
+      "description": "Envelope contract version. Bumps only on a breaking shape change.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "Tool that produced this result.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "schema_version",
+    "tool",
+    "data",
+    "meta"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful scope context about what data categories are returned, but discloses nothing extra about behavior (e.g. missing-data handling, coverage limits, sourcing).

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 purpose followed by a compact domain inventory. The parenthetical lists are information-dense rather than filler, though the enumeration is long enough to be slightly list-heavy.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it adequately scopes the data domains covered. The main gap is absent routing guidance among the many ESG-adjacent siblings, which is a usage rather than a completeness concern.

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% with both parameters documented (ticker as NZX symbol, year as fiscal-year filter), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no format or filtering nuance beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get ESG data for an NZX company') and enumerates the covered domains (emissions, diversity, safety, reporting standards), which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like get_esg_xbrl or get_esg_disclosure_benchmark. It does not explicitly name any sibling it is not, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no reference to alternatives such as get_esg_disclosure_gap or get_esg_target_credibility. Usage is only implied by the domain description, leaving the agent to infer routing from sibling names alone.

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

All nzxplorer-mcp toolsInspect
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