List the tracked stock exchanges as lightweight summaries (id, name, city, country, timezone, region, importance). Optionally filter by region (e.g. "Asia", "Americas", "Europe"). Use this to discover valid exchange ids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | No | Optional region filter, case-insensitive (e.g. "Asia", "Americas", "Europe"). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the output is 'lightweight summaries' with an optional filter, and implies no side effects. No contradiction.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states action and output fields. Second sentence adds optional filter and purpose. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fully adequate. It explains the output fields, optional filter behavior, and the primary use case of discovering exchange IDs.
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 describes the region parameter as an optional string filter. The description adds value by specifying it is case-insensitive and providing example values ('Asia', 'Americas', 'Europe'), which aids correct invocation.
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 the tool lists tracked stock exchanges as lightweight summaries with specific fields (id, name, city, country, timezone, region, importance). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'lightweight summaries' and the purpose of discovering valid exchange ids, differentiating it from get_exchange which likely provides detailed info.
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 states 'Use this to discover valid exchange ids' providing a clear use case. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it, the context of sibling tools suggests using this for listing and get_exchange for details, which is reasonably inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.