Cmf Chile

Cmf Regulation

cmf_regulation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up CMF regulations: NCG (normas de carácter general), CIR (circulares) and OFC (oficios circulares). Pass a number (with type NCG|CIR|OFC) to resolve one norm, e.g. type=NCG number=514 returns its title, issue date, PDF link, the resolution that approved it, and which norms modify, repeal or are modified by it. Or pass a Spanish keyword query (e.g. "finanzas abiertas") and/or a year to list matching norms, newest first. At least one of number, query or year is required.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "type": "NCG",
      "number": 514
    },
    "name": "cmf_regulation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	No	Norm type. Default ALL.
`year`	No	Issue year, e.g. 2026.
`limit`	No	Max norms to return (default 20, max 100).
`query`	No	Spanish keyword(s) searched in the norm text/title, e.g. "finanzas abiertas".
`number`	No	Norm number, e.g. 514.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`found`	No
`source`	No
`results`	No
`returned`	No
`data_as_of`	No
`scope_searched`	No
`total_matching`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 26, 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 open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by naming what a single-norm lookup returns (title, issue date, PDF link, approving resolution, and modifying/repealing relationships) and the ordering of list results ('newest first') — useful traits not in the annotations. Pagination/limit behavior is left to the schema.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource, then the two operating modes, then the hard constraint — a logical order that is easy to scan. It is dense but nearly every clause carries information; the parenthetical acronym expansions and the mode-one example are mildly redundant with the schema but still aid comprehension.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only, filter-driven lookup with full schema coverage, annotations and an output schema, this covers everything an agent needs to call it correctly: the norm families, the two invocation modes, the minimum-argument rule, and result ordering. Return shape is handled by the output schema and merely illustrated, not required, here.

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 the baseline is 3; the description earns more by supplying a concrete worked parameter combination (type=NCG number=514), clarifying that query must be Spanish, and adding the cross-parameter constraint that at least one of number/query/year is required — a rule the schema (required: []) does not express.

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 (look up CMF regulations) and enumerates exactly which norm families are covered (NCG, CIR, OFC), which lets an agent judge scope without opening the schema. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings cmf_registry or cmf_sanctions, which is the only thing keeping it from 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly describes two modes of use: resolve a single norm by type+number, or list matches by keyword query and/or year, with an example for each. It also states the minimum invocation requirement ('At least one of number, query or year is required'), which is real routing guidance. No exclusion versus sibling tools is given.

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

All Cmf Chile 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.