Wise MCP Server

Compare with banks and others

compare_prices

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare the cost of sending money with Wise versus banks and other providers by checking fees, exchange rates, recipient amount, and delivery speed for a given amount.

Instructions

What sending an amount costs with Wise and with banks and other money transfer providers: each one's fee, rate, what arrives and how fast. Public price data from Wise.

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": {
      "source_currency": "<source_currency>",
      "target_currency": "<target_currency>",
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "compare_prices"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`amount`	Yes	The amount sent.
`source_country`	No	Where it is sent from, ISO code such as GB.
`target_country`	No	Where it arrives, ISO code such as ES.
`source_currency`	Yes	From, such as GBP.
`target_currency`	Yes	To, such as EUR.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningfully beyond that by disclosing the data source ('Public price data from Wise'), implying no user-specific auth scope is needed, and by describing the shape of what comes back (each provider's fee, rate, arrived amount, speed), which matters because there is no 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

It is a single tight sentence with a colon-delimited enumeration, and nothing is padded. The opening clause ('What sending an amount costs with Wise and with banks...') is slightly convoluted before reaching the point, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

With five parameters, three required, and no output schema, the description does well to enumerate the returned comparison fields and note the data is public. It is still incomplete on routing (no mention of get_rate/create_quote) and says nothing about the two optional country parameters or whether omitting them narrows the comparison.

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 100%, so all five parameters (amount, source/target currency, source/target country) are already documented with examples and constraints. The description only echoes the notion of 'amount' being sent and says nothing about the optional country parameters or how they interact with currency, so it lands at the baseline rather than adding value.

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?

The description states a concrete outcome: comparing what sending an amount costs across Wise, banks and other providers, broken down into fee, rate, amount received and speed. That is more specific than a restatement of the name 'compare_prices', though it never explicitly positions itself against nearby tools such as get_rate or create_quote.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent must infer from 'what sending an amount costs' that this is a pre-transfer research tool, and cannot tell from the text why it would pick this over get_rate or create_quote, both of which appear in the sibling list.

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