Skip to main content
Glama

CDF Finance

by io.github.VessellTech

Criar cartão

create_card

Cria um novo cartão de crédito para o usuário autenticado, com limite usado e fatura atual zerados.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNome/apelido do cartão, ex: 'Nubank Roxinho'
brandNoEx: VISA, MASTERCARD
colorNoCor hex para exibição, ex: #3B82F6
limitNoLimite total do cartão. Omita para criar um cartão 'Sem Limite' (sem teto de crédito)
dueDayYesDia do vencimento da fatura (1-31)
currencyNoMoeda ISO 4217, default BRL
accountIdNoID da conta usada para pagar a fatura deste cartão
closingDayYesDia do fechamento da fatura (1-31)
lastFourDigitsNoÚltimos 4 dígitos do cartão, só para exibição

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
nameNo
brandNo
colorNo
limitNoLimite do cartão; null = Sem Limite
dueDayNo
userIdNo
currencyNo
accountIdNo
createdAtNo
limitUsedNo
updatedAtNo
closingDayNo
currentInvoiceNoTotal da fatura atual (não paga)
lastFourDigitsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / accountId / description
      Previous value: -"Conta associada ao pagamento da fatura"New value: +"ID da conta usada para pagar a fatura deste cartão"
    • addedInput schema / properties / color
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Cor hex para exibição, ex: #3B82F6",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / currency
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Moeda ISO 4217, default BRL",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / lastFourDigits / description
      Added value: +"Últimos 4 dígitos do cartão, só para exibição"
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Limite total do cartão"New value: +"Limite total do cartão. Omita para criar um cartão 'Sem Limite' (sem teto de crédito)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Nome/apelido do cartão, ex: 'Nubank Roxinho'"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "limit",
-  "closingDay",
-  "dueDay"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "closingDay",
+  "dueDay"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by specifying that a newly created card starts with used limit and current invoice at zero and is scoped to the authenticated user. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 that moves from action to resource to behavioral details without filler. Every clause earns its place: scope, resource type, and the zeroed initial state.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a create tool with an output schema, exhaustive schema descriptions, and safety annotations, the description covers the essential domain semantics that are not in structured fields. Explicit alternative routing is the only missing element, and that is already accounted for in usage_guidelines.

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 the baseline is 3 even without parameter information in the tool description. The description adds no field-level semantics, but the input schema fully documents all nine parameters, including requirements and defaults.

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 states a specific verb ('Cria'), a clear resource ('cartão de crédito'), and adds meaningful scope ('para o usuário autenticado') plus initial state details. This distinguishes it from sibling creation tools such as create_account, create_transaction, and update_card.

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?

The description implies the tool is for creating a new card for the authenticated user, but it never explicitly states when to choose it over alternatives like update_card/delete_card/list_cards. It provides no exclusions or alternative routing, so guidance is only implicit.

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

All CDF Finance toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The tools are individually well-described and many cross-reference their closest neighbors, but the set contains several easily confused clusters: create_transaction/confirm_new_transaction, update_equity/add_equity_valuation, the invoice tools (current_invoice, next_invoice, list_pending_invoices, get_invoice), and the many analytics/projection tools. The descriptions help a careful reader, but with 81 tools an agent is likely to misselect among these overlapping surfaces.

Naming Consistency3/5

CRUD operations consistently use create_/list_/update_/delete_ plus a resource noun, and all names are snake_case. However, there is a large second group of noun-phrase analytics tools (cashflow_forecast, spending_projection, categories_insights, transport_routine) plus one-off verbs such as can_afford, pay_invoice, and validate_current_invoices, so the naming convention is mixed even though it remains readable.

Tool Count1/5

81 tools is far beyond the practical MCP tool surface and exceeds the rubric's 50+ extreme-mismatch threshold. Even if each tool maps to a real finance endpoint, the volume overwhelms an agent's context window and makes selection much harder.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the finance lifecycle extensively: accounts, cards, invoices, transactions, recurring rules, budgets, goals, debts, equities, categories, tags, cost centers, profile, projections, and insights all have working read/write paths. Minor gaps remain, such as no update/delete for tags and no direct update/delete for system-generated invoices, but agents can usually work around these.

Resources