Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wallos-mcp

wallos-mcp

by LovelessCodes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Manage a currency

manage_currency
Destructive

Add, edit, or delete account currencies with name, symbol, ISO code, and exchange rate; deletion is blocked while subscriptions still use the currency.

Instructions

Adds, edits or deletes a currency on the account. A currency needs a name, a symbol and an ISO code, and its rate is relative to the main currency. Wallos refuses to delete one that subscriptions still use.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "manage_currency"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe entry to edit or delete, by name or id. Required for edit and delete, ignored for add.
codeNoISO currency code, e.g. "EUR". Required for add and edit.
nameNoCurrency name, e.g. "Euro". Required for add and edit.
rateNoExchange rate against the account’s main currency. Defaults to 1.
actionYesWhat to do: add a new entry, edit an existing one, or delete it.
symbolNoCurrency symbol, e.g. "€". Required for add and edit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, openWorld=true and non-idempotent, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavioral rules beyond them: a currency needs name, symbol and ISO code, its rate is relative to the main currency, and deletion is blocked when subscriptions reference it. It does not say what happens on edit when only some fields are supplied, nor how failures are surfaced.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action set and followed by the two domain rules that matter most (required fields, delete guard). Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

With six parameters, full schema coverage, an action enum and a boundary-setting annotation set, the description covers the essential gap: the multi-action dispatch and the referential-integrity rule on delete. Minor omissions (edit partiality, return/confirmation behavior) are low-risk since no output schema exists but responses are just confirmations.

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 the baseline of 3 applies. The description restates required fields (name, symbol, ISO code) and the rate-to-main-currency relationship, all of which the schema already documents, adding no new syntax, constraints or defaults.

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?

States a concrete verb set (adds, edits, deletes) against a specific resource (a currency on the account), so there is no ambiguity about what the tool does. It does not need to disambiguate from siblings like manage_category or manage_payment_method because those operate on different resources, but it also never mentions them, so it stops short of a full 5.

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 the create/edit/delete contexts and gives one genuine when-not condition (deletion is refused while subscriptions still use the currency). It offers no guidance on related flows, such as fetching existing currencies before editing or how this relates to get_master_data / get_account for currency lookup.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools