list_currenciesRetrieve all supported currency codes and their full names from European Central Bank reference data to identify valid currencies for exchange-rate queries.
List all currency codes the service supports, with their full names.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and scope are covered structurally. The description adds only that results include full names alongside codes; it says nothing about ordering, completeness, or caching, so it adds modest value beyond the 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?
A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource and the payload contents with no filler or redundancy.
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 parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is nearly self-sufficient; it tells the agent what comes back. Only minor details like ordering or whether codes are ISO-4217 are absent.
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?
The tool takes no parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. Schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing further the description could clarify about inputs.
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 names a specific verb (list) and resource (currency codes the service supports) plus the returned detail (full names). It is clearly distinct from the sibling rate/convert tools, though it does not explicitly say so.
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?
No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given; usage is only implied by the tool's nature as a reference/enumeration endpoint. For a zero-parameter lookup tool this is adequate but leaves routing to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.