brasil-data-mcp

consultar_taxa

Retrieve the current value of a Brazilian economic rate (SELIC, CDI, or IPCA) in JSON format, including its name and annual percentage. Use this to answer queries about today's rates.

Instructions

Consulta o valor atual de uma taxa econômica brasileira (SELIC, CDI, IPCA) via BrasilAPI. Retorna em JSON: nome da taxa e valor atual (% ao ano). Use quando o usuário perguntar 'qual a SELIC hoje?', 'CDI atual?', 'inflação do IPCA?' — qualquer pergunta sobre o valor corrente de uma taxa específica. NÃO use para: série histórica (a API devolve só o último valor), outras taxas além de SELIC/CDI/IPCA, ou consultar dólar/bolsa (não está nesta API). Pra panorama com todas as 3 taxas use listar_taxas.

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": {
      "sigla": "<sigla>"
    },
    "name": "consultar_taxa"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sigla`	Yes	Sigla da taxa, case-insensitive. Aceita: 'Selic' (taxa básica de juros), 'CDI' (Certificado de Depósito Interbancário), 'IPCA' (inflação oficial).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.2.0May 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses return format (JSON with name and value), limitation (only latest value, no history), and is clearly read-only. Could explicitly state 'read-only' but context makes it evident.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Description is 3 sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, then usage guidelines. Efficient and well-structured; slight room to be more concise (e.g., bullet points) but no fluff.

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?

For a simple 1-param tool, description covers purpose, usage, exclusions, and return format. Could mention error handling or API reliability, but overall sufficient.

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 already covers the single parameter (sigla) with values, case-insensitivity, and meanings. Description adds no new info beyond schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it consults current Brazilian economic rates (SELIC, CDI, IPCA) via BrasilAPI, with specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tool listar_taxas, which provides an overview of all three.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use (user asks for current specific rate), when not to use (historical data, other rates, dollar/stock market), and alternative tool (listar_taxas for all three rates). No ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server