iran-bourse-mcp

energy_market

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query Iran Energy Exchange physical auctions and electricity market data to retrieve results, announced offers, auction terms, or market status for a chosen date.

Instructions

Iran Energy Exchange (بورس انرژی ایران, IRENEX): physical auctions (liquefied gas, solvents, CSO, hexane, liquid nitrogen and other oil, gas and petrochemical products; domestic and international rings) and the electricity market (standard, free and green power contracts), from the exchange's own site (iee.ir). view='trades' gives each auction's result: product, supplier, ring and destination, contract type, offered / demand / traded volume, base and average price and the exchange's value in RIAL; view='offers' the announced auctions; view='auction' one auction's terms, price units, buy and sell order levels and trades; view='overview' whether the market is open and today's traded value. Units differ by product and are spelled out per row: tonne auctions in rial are priced per KILOGRAM, dollar auctions per TONNE, premium auctions as a premium on a reference price, electricity in kW of capacity over the delivery period with kwh the energy and the price per kWh (see price_basis and totals.volume_by_unit; volumes of different units are never added). Without a date the latest session is used; the exchange trades Saturday to Wednesday. The traded boards (electricity forwards and base-load contracts, capacity and energy-saving certificates, energy futures) are in top_lists (energy group).

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": "energy_market"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	Gregorian 2026-11-03 / 20261103 or Jalali 1405/08/12. Omit for the latest trading day.
`view`	No	'trades' (default): auction results. 'offers': announced auctions. 'auction': one auction by auction_id, with terms, buy and sell orders and trades. 'overview': is it trading, and today's totals.	trades
`limit`	No	Maximum rows to return (default 20) (max 100)
`market`	No	'physical' (oil products, gas, petrochemicals, industrial gases) or 'power' (electricity). Omit for both. Applies to trades and offers.
`product`	No	Fragment of the product, description, supplier or symbol, e.g. 'گاز مایع', 'نیتروژن', 'برق سبز', 'شازند'. Applies to trades and offers.
`sort_by`	No	value (default), volume, name or time
`to_date`	No	Range bound: Gregorian 2026-11-03 / 20261103 or Jalali 1405/08/12. Omit for no bound.
`auction_id`	No	Auction number (the auction_id of a trades or offers row). Required for view='auction'.
`traded_only`	No	True (default): only auctions that traded. False also lists auctions that ended without a trade.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.4.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, yet the description adds real value beyond them: the exchange trades Saturday–Wednesday, an omitted date falls back to the latest session, and unit semantics vary per row (rial tonne auctions priced per kilogram, dollar auctions per tonne, electricity in kW capacity with kWh energy). It does not mention rate limits or pagination beyond the limit parameter.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The content is valuable but delivered as one densely packed block of semicolon-chained clauses and nested parentheses, with the crucial unit caveat buried mid-paragraph. A short front-loaded sentence plus per-view bullets would scan far better for an agent parsing tool selection.

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 nine-parameter, view-switching tool with no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting: it lists the returned fields for 'trades' (product, supplier, ring, destination, contract type, volumes, base/average price, rial value) and characterizes the other views. Return shape for 'offers' and 'overview' is only sketched, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented, but the description adds interpretive meaning the schema lacks: how prices and volumes must be read per product unit, that volumes of different units are never summed (price_basis, totals.volume_by_unit), and that auction_id is only meaningful for view='auction'. Date/date-range and limit mechanics are left entirely to the schema.

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?

The description names the specific venue (Iran Energy Exchange / IRENEX), the two product universes (physical auctions and electricity), and the source site. It enumerates exactly what each view returns, so an agent can tell it apart from commodity_market or top_lists without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It routes clearly between views ('trades' for results, 'offers' for announced auctions, 'auction' for one auction's terms, 'overview' for open/closed status) and explicitly forwards traded boards (forwards, certificates, futures) to top_lists. It does not say when to prefer commodity_market or futures_market over this tool, so the sibling boundary is only partially drawn.

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