TWSE MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'obtain' which implies a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's real-time or historical data, format of returns, rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does, with zero waste or redundancy.

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 1 parameter with 0% schema coverage, an output schema exists (which helps), and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and parameter context but lacks details on usage, behavior, or output specifics, leaving room for improvement in guiding an agent.

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 description adds meaning by specifying that the 'code' parameter should be a 'stock code' for a 'listed company', which clarifies its purpose beyond the schema's generic 'Code' title. With 0% schema description coverage and only 1 parameter, this provides adequate compensation, though it doesn't detail format (e.g., ticker symbol conventions).

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 verb 'obtain' and the resource 'investor communications information for a listed company', specifying it's based on stock code. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like get_company_shareholder_meeting_announcements or get_company_major_news, which might also relate to investor communications.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools focused on company information (e.g., get_company_profile, get_company_major_news), the description lacks context on what specific type of investor communications it retrieves or when it's preferred over other tools.

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