TWSE MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's behavior by specifying it returns comprehensive statistics in a formatted string, including details like industry categories and holding percentages, but lacks information on rate limits, data freshness, or error handling, which are important for a read-only statistical tool.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence, followed by details on return values. It is appropriately sized with no redundant information, though the bulleted list could be slightly condensed for efficiency.

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 no annotations, 0 parameters, and no output schema, the description provides a clear purpose and return format, but it lacks context on data sources, update frequency, or limitations, which could help the agent use it more effectively in complex scenarios.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate, earning a baseline score of 4 for not introducing unnecessary complexity.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('foreign and mainland China investment holding ratios by industry category'), distinguishing it from siblings by focusing on foreign investment statistics in the Taiwan stock market, unlike tools for trading info, company data, or market indices.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it implies usage for foreign investment statistics, it does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or compare to similar tools like 'get_top_foreign_holdings', leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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