Skip to main content
Glama

Wudao A-Share Stock Data MCP

by io.github.jcdreamjc
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

watchlist_group_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

删除当前 API key 所属用户的自选股分组。股票仍保留在自选股中，只移出该组。写入工具，仅在用户明确要求删除/清理分组时使用。 何时使用: 删除当前 API key 所属用户的自选股分组。股票仍保留在自选股中，只移出该组。只有用户明确要求删除/清理分组时调用。

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNocontent[0].text：默认1行 headline；markdown=完整 markdown 表格；json=完整 JSON。
groupNameYes必填。要删除的自选股分组名。删除分组不会删除股票，组内股票仍保留在自选股中。
detailLevelNo档位：默认 standard（Agent 可计算标准字段）；summary=压缩摘要；raw=全字段+原始数据。
onlyIfEmptyNotrue=仅当该分组为空时才删除；false=即使组内有股票也删除分组并保留股票。默认 false。

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
metaNo
successNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / detailLevel / description
      Previous value: -"输出详细度（不传=standard，返回 Agent 可计算标准字段）。summary=压缩摘要；raw=全字段+原始数据。"New value: +"档位：默认 standard（Agent 可计算标准字段）；summary=压缩摘要；raw=全字段+原始数据。"
    • changedInput schema / properties / format / description
      Previous value: -"content[0].text 形态。通常不传=1 行 headline；auction_market_scan / auction_theme_strength 在 standard/raw 档默认直接返回 JSON 明细。markdown=完整 markdown 表格；json=完整 JSON。"New value: +"content[0].text：默认1行 headline；markdown=完整 markdown 表格；json=完整 JSON。"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {},
+    "meta": {},
+    "success": {}
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the crucial non-obvious detail that only the group is destroyed while constituent stocks remain in the watchlist, which an agent cannot infer from annotations alone.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is essentially written twice: the sentence about deleting the group and stocks remaining appears verbatim in both the main body and the '何时使用' section, and the write-tool guidance is likewise duplicated. Front-loaded, but the redundancy wastes a large fraction of the text.

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

Completeness4/5

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 explained, and annotations carry the destructive/idempotent profile. The description supplies the one thing an agent needs that structured fields lack: what is destroyed versus preserved, plus the explicit-request precondition.

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 groupName, onlyIfEmpty, format, and detailLevel are already fully documented. The description's stock-retention note overlaps with the groupName/onlyIfEmpty schema text rather than adding new parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (删除自选股分组) and immediately clarifies scope: the group for the user owning the current API key. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like watchlist_group_rename, watchlist_group_create, and watchlist_remove.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says it is a write tool to call only when the user clearly requests deletion/cleanup of a group ('仅在用户明确要求删除/清理分组时使用'). Clear triggering context, though it names no alternative (e.g., rename) for the adjacent use case.

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

All Wudao A-Share Stock Data MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources