Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Qiniso

Qiniso

Official
by qinisolabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

format_currency

Format numeric amounts into locale-aware currency strings with correct symbol placement and separators, ready for invoices or prices.

Instructions

USE THIS to format a money amount the way a reader in a locale expects (symbol position, separators) before showing it in a price, invoice or email. e.g. 1234.5 GBP en-GB → '£1,234.50'.

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": {
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "format_currency"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountYesThe numeric amount.
currencyNoISO 4217 currency code (default GBP).
localeNoBCP-47 locale (e.g. en-GB). Defaults from the currency.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Reveals locale-aware formatting (symbol position, separators) but omits details like rounding behavior, precision handling, or error cases. Adequate but not fully transparent.

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?

Two sentences plus an example, efficient and front-loaded with 'USE THIS'. Every sentence adds value.

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 formatting tool with good schema coverage, it covers purpose, usage, and example. Lacks edge case handling description, but overall sufficient.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. Description adds value with an example demonstrating usage with currency and locale, though it doesn't significantly extend beyond schema info.

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 verb 'format' and resource 'money amount', with specific usage context (before showing in price, invoice, email) and a concrete example. Distinguishes from sibling tools which are mostly validation tools.

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?

Explicit instructions 'USE THIS' and typical scenarios, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. However, no similar formatting siblings exist, so exclusions are unnecessary.

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