Retrieve exchange rates for Euro, Japanese Yen, British Pound, and Canadian Dollar between two dates (yyyy-MM-dd) to track currency performance.
Euro, yen, libra y dolar canadiense en rango (yyyy-MM-dd). / EUR/JPY/GBP/CAD range.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| fecha_fin | Yes | ||
| fecha_ini | Yes |
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 behavioral burden. It implies a historical read operation but omits permissions, rate limits, timezone, date inclusivity, and any mutation/read safety context.
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?
The description is very short and front-loads the currencies and date range. The Spanish and English currency lists are partially redundant, but there is no wasted sentence.
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 two-date range tool with no annotations, no output schema, and bare parameter schema, the description is underspecified. It does not state what is returned (e.g., MXN-based rates per currency), date inclusivity, or error behavior.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% and the parameter titles are only 'Fecha Ini' and 'Fecha Fin'. The description supplies the required yyyy-MM-dd format, which adds useful meaning, but does not clarify inclusivity, timezone, or start/end semantics.
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 specific currencies (EUR/JPY/GBP/CAD) and a date range, which identifies the resource clearly. It distinguishes from get_dolar_hoy (today's dollar) and partially from get_tasas_rango by restricting to four currencies, though it lacks an explicit verb.
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?
The description provides no when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or exclusions. It only states the currencies and date format, leaving the agent to infer why to choose this over get_tasas_rango or get_dolar_hoy.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.