TWSE MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does without mentioning any behavioral traits like data freshness, format, time range, rate limits, or authentication needs. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's zero parameters and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It does not cover behavioral aspects like data format, time range, or limitations, which are important for a historical data tool, leaving room for improvement.

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, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter information is needed. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate, but it also doesn't clarify any implicit parameters (e.g., date ranges), slightly reducing the score from a perfect 5.

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 resource ('historical data for Taiwan 50 Index'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_taiwan_island_index_history' or other index-related tools, which prevents a perfect score.

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, such as 'get_taiwan_island_index_history' or other market index tools. There are no explicit instructions on context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage ambiguous.

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