Zerodha MCP Integration

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read operation, but it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, returns real-time or cached data, has rate limits, or what format the output takes. For a financial data tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise at three words, which is appropriate for a simple tool. However, it could be more front-loaded with context (e.g., 'Retrieve margin trading information for the authenticated account') to better serve the agent immediately.

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 financial context and sibling tools suggesting account operations, the description is incomplete. With no annotations, no output schema, and a vague purpose, it doesn't provide enough information for reliable tool selection. A better description would clarify what 'margins' means and typical use cases.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description doesn't need to compensate for parameter gaps, and 'Get account margins' appropriately implies no required inputs. Baseline 4 is appropriate for parameterless tools.

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 'Get account margins' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('account margins'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what 'margins' means in this financial context and doesn't differentiate from siblings like get_holdings or get_positions, which also retrieve account information.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (like authentication), timing considerations, or how it differs from other account information tools in the sibling list, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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