Current ERC-8056 ui-multiplier per tokenized stock, with the previous value and when it changed. A multiplier change IS a corporate action — a split or stock dividend — detected from the onchain transfer ratio at a specific block, not from an announcement feed. Essential for interpreting historical prices and share counts across a split. Pairs with the robinhood-chain-kit npm package.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the underlying detection mechanism (onchain transfer ratio at a specific block), clarifies that a change signifies a corporate action, and warns that it is not from an announcement feed. This goes beyond the tool name but does not cover potential edge cases like rate limits or data availability.
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?
The description is four sentences, each adding essential information. It front-loads the primary purpose and uses no filler words. It also earns its length by explaining the tool's unique relevance.
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 the lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the return data (current value, previous value, and change time) and its significance. It could add details on data format or units, but the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke and interpret the result.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaningful context about what data is returned (current, previous, time of change) without needing to explain any parameters.
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?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves the current ERC-8056 ui-multiplier per tokenized stock along with previous value and change time. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on corporate actions (splits/dividends) and explicitly mentions pairing with the robinhood-chain-kit npm package.
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?
The description provides a clear use case: 'Essential for interpreting historical prices and share counts across a split.' It also clarifies that the multiplier change is detected from onchain transfer ratio at a specific block, not from an announcement feed, which helps avoid misuse. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use this one.
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.
