finwire.pl - Polish financial data

Mortgage payment risk and fixed-rate premium

get_rate_risk

Read-onlyIdempotent

finwire model on WIBOR fixings and bank offers: finwire_rate_risk_gauge (Ryzyko raty finwire) - chance that the payment of a PLN 400,000, 30-year variable-rate mortgage rises by more than 5% or 10% (or falls by more than 5%) in 3, 6 and 12 months, with the 10th/50th/90th percentile of the payment and backtest accuracy since 2008 (80% interval coverage); finwire_fixed_rate_premium (Premia za stałą stopę finwire) - the typical 5-year fixed rate minus the expected cost of the variable rate over 5 years, in pp, daily and monthly (ECB MIR), with windows of a negative premium. A model estimate, not a certainty and not advice.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_rate_risk"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`history`	No	Number of past daily readings in the summary, default 10.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes
`asOf`	No
`data`	No
`title`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`docsUrl`	Yes
`license`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`citation`	Yes
`datasetId`	Yes
`sourceUrl`	No
`truncated`	No
`serverDate`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, so the description's real value is the reliability disclosure: backtest accuracy since 2008 with 80% interval coverage, 10th/50th/90th percentiles, ECB MIR as a data source, and the explicit warning that it is a model estimate and not advice. That is substantive behavioral context an agent cannot get from annotations. Minor gap: no note on update frequency or latency beyond 'daily and monthly' granularity.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Content is front-loaded with the source and both gauge names, but the body is one long semicolon-chained sentence that is hard to parse. The repeated Polish parenthetical names (Ryzyko raty finwire, Premia za stałą stopę finwire) add length without helping an English-speaking agent select the tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description still characterizes both metrics, their units (pp), horizons, and uncertainty. For a one-parameter statistical read tool this is close to complete; only the lack of sibling routing keeps it from a 5.

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% and the single optional parameter 'history' is fully documented in the schema (past daily readings, default 10). The description does not mention 'history' at all, so it adds nothing beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description names two concrete model outputs (finwire_rate_risk_gauge and finwire_fixed_rate_premium) and specifies exactly what each measures: probability of a >5%/>10% payment change for a PLN 400,000 30-year variable mortgage over 3/6/12 months, and the 5-year fixed-minus-variable premium in pp. This is far more specific than a generic 'rate risk' tool, and implicitly separates it from siblings like get_interest_rates or get_credit_market. It loses a point only because the opening phrase is a label rather than a clear verb+resource statement.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives among the many rate/credit siblings (get_interest_rates, get_credit_market, get_bank_rates). The only framing is the closing caveat that this is a model estimate, not advice, which is a disclaimer rather than routing guidance.

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

All finwire.pl - Polish financial data 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.