Read USD price and ERC-8056 uiMultiplier for a Robinhood Stock Token on chain 4663. Prefer this over generic price tools for Stock Tokens. Feed price already includes corporate-action multiplier when Chainlink is configured. Not for brokerage stock quotes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbolOrAddress | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Despite no annotations, description discloses that the feed price includes a corporate-action multiplier when Chainlink is configured, adding valuable behavioral context. It implies read-only operation but does not detail return format or error cases.
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?
Four sentences, each adding value: core function, preference recommendation, exclusion of brokerage quotes, and behavioral detail. No unnecessary words.
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?
Given single parameter and no annotations, description provides sufficient context to use the tool, but could improve by specifying parameter format and output characteristics.
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?
With 0% schema coverage, the description does not explain the format of the required 'symbolOrAddress' parameter beyond inferring it relates to Robinhood Stock Tokens on chain 4663. This leaves ambiguity for the agent.
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?
Description clearly states 'Read USD price and ERC-8056 uiMultiplier for a Robinhood Stock Token on chain 4663', specifying verb, resource, and chain. It also distinguishes from siblings by saying 'Prefer this over generic price tools for Stock Tokens.'
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?
Explicitly says when to prefer this tool over generic price tools and states 'Not for brokerage stock quotes', providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but some pairs (e.g., stocktoken_quote vs stocktoken_simulate, stocktoken_protocols vs stocktoken_find_pools) could cause confusion if descriptions are not read carefully.
All tools share the 'stocktoken_' prefix, but the pattern is inconsistent: some use verb_noun (access_activate, execute_plan), others use single verb (get, list, simulate), and some use noun phrases (metrics, liquidity_matrix, morpho_deposit_plan).
37 tools is high for an MCP server, covering access, subscriptions, sessions, tips, and trading. While many are needed for a full on-chain system, the count feels excessive and could be streamlined.
The server covers most major operations: listing, pricing, quoting, simulation, execution planning, liquidity, access control, and system management. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no broadcast tool, no explicit cancel/undo), but overall it's comprehensive.