macro_seriesRetrieve daily US Treasury yield curve points, curve spreads, and stablecoin supply series. Filter by series name and date range to get specific macro data.
US Treasury yield curve points, curve spreads and stablecoin supply as daily series. Filter by series name and date range.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | ||
| from | No | YYYY-MM-DD | |
| series | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that data is daily and filterable by series and date range, but it does not explain what happens with omitted parameters, default date behavior, output format, or invalid series names.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence that front-loads the core content and then states the filter capability. Every word contributes to understanding the tool; no filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the schema only covers 33% of parameters. The description does not provide enough detail—such as valid series names, date range inclusivity, or behavior when parameters are omitted—for an agent to reliably construct a correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema only documents 'from' with a date format, leaving 'to' and 'series' undocumented. The description adds meaning by grouping them as 'series name and date range,' which clarifies that 'to' is also a date and 'series' is the targeted series, but it still does not define accepted series values or exact date semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description identifies a concrete resource—US Treasury yield curve points, curve spreads, and stablecoin supply as daily series—and states that it can be filtered by series name and date range. This content clearly differentiates it from siblings like economic_calendar, policy_rates, and treasury_auctions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use the tool through its content (daily macro series) but provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling to choose as an alternative. The filtering mention is operational, not comparative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.