get_linked_algoRead a LinkedAlgo on a live instance owned by this agent: parameters, capital, symbols, mcp_require_confirm (null=inherit), and effective_confirm.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instance_id | Yes | Trading instance ID from list_instances. | |
| linked_algo_id | Yes | Linked algorithm ID on that instance. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| error | No | ||
| message | No | ||
| success | No | ||
| linked_algo | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / descriptionPrevious value: -"Structured Gogi result. Error responses include error and message fields."New value: +"Structured result. Error responses include error and message."Output schema / propertiesAdded value: +{
+ "error": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "linked_algo": {
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "message": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "success": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+}Input schema / properties / instance_id / descriptionAdded value: +"Trading instance ID from list_instances."Input schema / properties / linked_algo_id / descriptionAdded value: +"Linked algorithm ID on that instance."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "description": "Structured Gogi result. Error responses include error and message fields.",
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the instance must be 'live' and 'owned by this agent', and it discloses inheritance semantics ('mcp_require_confirm (null=inherit)') plus an 'effective_confirm' resolution field, which is genuine behavioral detail about how the value is computed.
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 dense sentence that front-loads the verb and resource before the field list; nothing is filler. Slightly list-heavy but every clause maps to a real returned element.
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?
With an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, and annotations cover safety. Parameters are fully documented in the schema and the scoping/auth context is given, so an agent has what it needs; only the when-to-use framing against update_linked_algo is missing.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters (instance_id, linked_algo_id) carry their own descriptions naming list_instances as the source. The description adds the 'live instance owned by this agent' scoping constraint on instance_id but nothing on the ID format, so the schema still does the heavy lifting – baseline 3.
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?
States a specific verb ('Read') plus the exact resource ('a LinkedAlgo on a live instance owned by this agent') and even enumerates the contents returned (parameters, capital, symbols, confirm flags). An agent can immediately distinguish it from the write sibling update_linked_algo.
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?
Usage is implied by the resource ('read a linked algorithm') but the description never states when to reach for this versus update_linked_algo or how it fits relative to get_portfolio/list_my_algos. No exclusions or prerequisites are given, so guidance is only inferable from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.