Skip to main content
Glama
marlon-iac

dlp-invest-mcp

by marlon-iac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

obter_extrato_tool

Retrieve a portfolio financial statement by portfolio ID or name, with optional date range and pagination.

Instructions

Recupera o extrato financeiro da carteira.

Args:
    carteira: ID ou nome da carteira.
    data_inicial: Data inicial no formato YYYY-MM-DD.
    data_final: Data final no formato YYYY-MM-DD.
    limite: Maximo de resultados.
    offset: Paginacao.

Returns:
    Dict with ``success`` and either ``data`` or ``error``.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limiteNo
offsetNo
carteiraNo
data_finalNo
data_inicialNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return envelope (success plus data or error), but says nothing about read-only nature, permission requirements, rate limits, or the effect of the defaulted limite/offset values on result volume.

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?

The Args/Returns docstring structure is compact and front-loaded, with the purpose stated in the first line and no filler. It is appropriately sized for a five-parameter retrieval tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so the brief Returns note is adequate. Still missing are the behavioral details an agent needs for a portfolio statement call: whether date range is inclusive, whether omitting carteira aggregates all portfolios, and how pagination terminates.

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%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning; it documents all five params including the YYYY-MM-DD date format and that carteira accepts an ID or name. It does not explain that every parameter is optional/nullable or what the defaults (limite=100, offset=0) imply, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 specific verb and resource ("Recupera o extrato financeiro da carteira"), which is clear enough to distinguish from obter_carteira_tool or obter_rentabilidade_tool. However, it never contrasts itself with the closest sibling, obter_operacoes_tool, so an agent must guess whether "extrato" and "operacoes" overlap.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as obter_operacoes_tool or obter_posicao_tool, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer the use case from the name alone.

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