Exchange

Get Rate

get_rate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the current exchange rate between two currencies (e.g., USD, EUR). Returns the rate value and timestamp.

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": {
      "to": "EUR",
      "from": "USD"
    },
    "name": "get_rate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	Yes	Target currency code (e.g., EUR, JPY, CHF)
`from`	Yes	Source currency code (e.g., USD, EUR, GBP)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	Target currency code (uppercase)
`date`	Yes	Date of the rate (ISO format)
`from`	Yes	Source currency code (uppercase)
`rate`	Yes	Current exchange rate

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "date": {
+      "description": "Date of the rate (ISO format)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "from": {
+      "description": "Source currency code (uppercase)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rate": {
+      "description": "Current exchange rate",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "to": {
+      "description": "Target currency code (uppercase)",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "from",
+    "to",
+    "rate",
+    "date"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "from": "USD",
+    "to": "EUR"
+  },
+  {
+    "from": "GBP",
+    "to": "JPY"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by stating the return value includes rate and timestamp, which is beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no wasted words. Each sentence contributes essential information about scope and return value.

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 simple, read-only tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies the input (two currencies), the output (rate and timestamp), and aligns with the current-rate context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description provides example currencies (USD, EUR) but does not add semantic meaning beyond the schema descriptions for 'from' and 'to'.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'current exchange rate between two currencies', with examples. It is distinct from siblings like get_historical_rate and convert, focusing on current rates.

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?

The description implies usage for current rates via the word 'current', but does not explicitly mention when to avoid it or name alternatives like get_historical_rate for historical data. Clear context but no exclusions.

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

All Exchange 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.