Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mouser-mcp

mouser-mcp

by bradford-tech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List Mouser currencies

list_currencies
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the currencies Mouser accepts, optionally filtered by shipping country code, to confirm available payment currencies before checkout.

Instructions

Currencies Mouser accepts, optionally for a shipping country code.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_currencies"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
shippingCountryCodeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.5

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing further: it does not say what an omitted country code returns, whether results are currency codes or objects, or whether availability varies by country.

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?

A single tight sentence with no wasted wording, and the optional filter follows immediately after the resource. It is perhaps over-compressed rather than verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a simple one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, so little is strictly required. Still, an agent cannot tell the return shape (codes vs. names) or the format expected for the country code, both of which a short sentence could have supplied.

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 0% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description is the only source of meaning. It does clarify that shippingCountryCode is optional and refers to a shipping (not billing) country, which is genuine added value, though it never states the expected format (ISO 3166 alpha-2, etc.).

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names the resource ('Currencies Mouser accepts') and its optional filter, which tells an agent roughly what it returns, but it is a noun phrase with no verb and never says 'list' or 'retrieve'. It is distinguishable from list_countries only by the word 'Currencies'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The phrase 'optionally for a shipping country code' hints that a parameter narrows results, but there is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus list_countries or get_order_options. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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