io.github.mohammad-abbasi-sh/ecb-mcp

ecb_interest_rates

Retrieve current ECB key interest rates for main refinancing operations, deposit facility, and marginal lending facility, including the date each rate took effect.

Instructions

Current key ECB interest rates: main refinancing operations, deposit facility and marginal lending facility — with the date each rate took effect (daily series, latest observation).

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": "ecb_interest_rates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the key behavioral constraint — a daily series returning only the latest observation, so no historical backfill — which prevents a real misunderstanding. However, it says nothing about data source, refresh cadence, or units (percentage points), leaving those to the output schema.

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?

A single sentence with the resource and its components front-loaded, followed by the recency qualifier. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 zero-parameter read with an output schema, the description covers what is returned and how current it is — the essentials. Minor gaps are the absence of unit/currency context and refresh behavior, both of which an agent could infer or find in the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema to disambiguate; the baseline applies. The description still adds value by characterizing the returned series as daily and current-period.

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 resource (current key ECB interest rates) and enumerates the three rate types returned: main refinancing operations, deposit facility and marginal lending facility. The topic is self-evidently distinct from siblings like ecb_exchange_rates or ecb_bond_yields, though it never names or contrasts with them explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'current' and 'latest observation' signal this is for a snapshot of policy rates, not a historical time series. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or pointer to an alternative for historical data.

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

Deploy Server