Retrieve Mexico's TIIE curve—1-day funding plus 28-, 91-, and 182-day rates—in one batch to compare interbank funding costs across maturities.
Curva TIIE: fondeo 1d + 28/91/182 en un lote. / TIIE curve.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'en un lote' hints that all tenors come back in a single batched call, which is useful, but nothing is said about data freshness, source, units, or error conditions for a rate-fetch tool.
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?
Two compact phrases, front-loaded with the resource name and immediately followed by scope. No filler, though the heavy abbreviation ('fondeo') borders on cryptic rather than concise.
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?
For a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description effectively substitutes for the missing return spec by listing the exact tenors returned (1d, 28, 91, 182). The only gap is the absence of format/freshness details.
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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.
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?
Names a specific resource (TIIE curve) and enumerates its scope (1d overnight plus 28/91/182 tenors returned in a batch), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_tasa_hoy that return a single current rate. The bilingual phrasing is terse but unambiguous about what is fetched.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. The agent must infer that this is the tool for multi-tenor TIIE term-structure data versus the single-rate siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.