Lista transferências (P2P sends + receives) do profile. Filtre por status (CSV de estados como 'incoming_payment_waiting,outgoing_payment_sent'), moeda, datas. SCA-protegido.
Bulk support: accepts profile_ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| status | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| profile_id | Yes | ||
| profile_ids | No | ||
| source_currency | No | ||
| target_currency | No | ||
| created_date_end | No | ||
| created_date_start | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool is SCA-protected and supports batched execution via profile_ids, which provides useful behavioral context beyond 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?
The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by filtering details and a note on bulk support. It is efficient, though the Portuguese language may reduce clarity for English-centric AI agents.
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?
With no output schema and 10 parameters, the description omits many details such as pagination, response format, error handling, and full parameter semantics. The SCA and batch notes add value but leave significant gaps for a complex tool.
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 0%, requiring the description to explain parameters. However, it only covers status, currency, and dates, leaving parameters like limit, offset, account, source_currency, target_currency, created_date_start/end, and profile_id (required) partially or unaddressed.
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 it lists P2P transfers (sends and receives) from a profile, using specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like wise_list_activities or wise_list_balances, but the focus on transfers is distinctive.
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 filter options (status, currency, dates) and mentions SCA protection and bulk support, but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose. The six general MCP platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) are separate from the six Wise-specific query tools (wise_get_balance_statement, wise_list_profiles, etc.). No two tools overlap in functionality.
The Wise-specific tools consistently follow the pattern 'wise_verb_noun' (e.g., wise_get_balance_statement, wise_list_profiles). The general tools use short descriptive names without a prefix, which is a minor inconsistency, but the grouping is logical and readable.
With 12 tools, the server is well-scoped. It provides sufficient coverage for both the MCP platform utilities and the Wise financial data integration without being bloated or sparse.
The tool set covers the core read operations for Wise (profiles, balances, transactions, card events, activities) and the essential MCP platform functions. Missing are write operations like creating transfers, but the server's focus appears to be data retrieval, so this is a minor gap.