Skip to main content
Glama

CDF Finance

by io.github.VessellTech

Listar investimentos

list_equities
Read-only

Lista os ativos de investimento (equities) do usuário, ordenados do mais recente para o mais antigo (createdAt desc). Cada item traz o valor/custo atuais (o mais recente registrado, seja por update_equity ou add_equity_valuation), não o histórico — para histórico de um ativo específico use list_equity_valuations, e para visão consolidada (totais, alocação, ganhos) use investments_workspace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context: results are sorted by createdAt descending, and each item reflects the most recent value/cost recorded via update_equity or add_equity_valuation, not the full historical series. This is meaningful behavior beyond the annotations, though pagination or rate-limit details are not mentioned.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The first sentence delivers the core function and ordering; the second explains data freshness and routes to sibling tools. Every clause earns its place.

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?

The output schema is present, so return structure is covered elsewhere. The description adds the semantic distinctions that matter for selection: ordering, latest-value behavior, and explicit sibling routing. For a zero-parameter read-only list tool, nothing critical is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% vacuously, so there is no parameter-level burden for the description to carry. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description uses the available space productively to explain output semantics rather than parameter meanings that don't exist.

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 and resource: it lists the user's investment assets (equities), including the ordering (createdAt desc) and what each item contains. It also clearly differentiates this tool from list_equity_valuations and investments_workspace, so an agent can select it correctly without opening sibling definitions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use alternatives: for history of a specific asset use list_equity_valuations, and for consolidated totals/allocation/gains use investments_workspace. It also clarifies that this tool returns the latest registered value, not history, which establishes the appropriate use case.

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