Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-brasilapi

mcp-brasilapi

by silasrm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

tickers__listar_fundos

Retrieve tickers of B3-listed investment funds by specifying the fund type (e.g., FII for real estate funds).

Instructions

Lista os tickers de fundos de investimento listados na B3.

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": {
      "type_fund": "<type_fund>"
    },
    "name": "tickers__listar_fundos"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
type_fundYesTipo de fundo (ex.: "fii" para fundos imobiliários).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description only states the basic purpose with no disclosure of behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden but adds minimal behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word is necessary and contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

For a simple listing tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on how this differs from the sibling fundos__listar and does not explain the response structure beyond the schema.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter (type_fund) described. The description adds an example value ("fii"), providing slight additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool lists tickers of investment funds listed on B3. The verb 'Lista' and resource 'fundos de investimento' are specific and distinguish it from sibling tools like tickers__listar_acoes (stocks).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fundos__listar. The usage is implied from the name and description, but no exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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